EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 29.09.2010 
SEC(2010) 1097 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Ex-Ante Evaluation for establishing a Pr ogramme to support further development 
towards an Integrated Maritime Policy 
 
Accompanying document to the 
  
Proposal for a REGULATION OF TH E EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE 
COUNCIL concerning the establishment of a Programme to support the Integrated 
Maritime Policy 
{COM(2010) 494 final} 
 
EN 2   EN 1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES  
1.1. Preparation and Organisation 
In line with the Commission's Practical Guide of December 2001 for Preparing Proposals for 
Expenditure Programmes1, the preparation and co-ordinatio n of the ex ante evaluation for 
establishing an EU Programme to  support the further developmen t of an Integrated Maritime 
Policy (IMP) was carried out by an internal DG MARE steer ing group, including members 
from the responsible operati onal Unit (Maritime Policy Unit, A1), the geographical Maritime 
Policy Units, as well as the DG MARE ev aluation and financial and budget Units.  
2. BACKGROUND  
2.1. Introduction and Policy background 
On 10 October 2007, the Commission adopted the Communication on an Integrated Maritime 
Policy for the European Union –COM(2007) 575 (''Blue Paper''). This Communication 
advocated the need for the development and im plementation of an integrated, coherent and 
overarching approach to the governance of the oceans, seas and coasts. In particular, the 
Integrated Maritime Policy aims to achieve  the following overarchi ng objectives: (1) to 
promote integration of governance structures by making them more inclusive and cooperative; 
(2) to build the knowledge base and cross cutting tools necessary to enable the 
implementation of integrated policies; (3) to im prove the quality of sectoral policies, through 
an active search for synergies and increased co herence across sectors; (4) in implementing all 
the above, to take account of specificities of the regional seas around Eu rope, through tailor-
made solutions. 
The Action Plan accompanying th e Communication on An Integrated Maritime Policy for the 
Union – SEC(2007) 1278 sets out a number of  actions that the European Commission 
proposed to take as a first step in implemen ting a new, integrated maritime policy for the 
European Union.2 Following the invitation of the Eu ropean Council of 14 December 2007 
which endorsed the EU In tegrated Maritime Policy3, the Commission adopted on 15 October 
2009 a Progress Report on the EU's Integrated  Maritime Policy –COM(2009) 540. In this 
Progress Report, the Commission summed up th e main achievements of the Integrated 
Maritime Policy and charted the course  for its next implementation phase.4 This progress 
report was accompanied by a Commission Staff Paper5 which presented in details the progress 
made so far on the items of the Action Plan adopted in October 2007. 
A continued modest financial underpinning is needed to enable the EU to implement and 
further develop the Integrated Maritime Policy and to pursue the overarching objectives as set 
                                                 
1 European Commission Ex Ante Evaluation – A Practical Guide for Preparing Proposals for Expenditure 
Programmes of 10 December 2001. 
2 The Communication on an Integrat ed Maritime Policy for the Europe an Union was accompanied by its 
own Impact Assessment (SEC (2007) 1279) and a Report on the results of a broad stakeholder 
consultation (COM (2007) 574 final). 
3 Presidency Conclusions of the European Council on 14 December 2007 – Doc. 16616/1/07 REV 1. 
4 Commission Progress Report on the EU's Integrated Maritime Policy – COM (2009) 540 final of 
15.10.2009, p. 2. 
5 SEC (2009) 1343 of 15.10.2009. 
 
EN 3   EN out in the Commission's Blue Paper of October 2007 and confirmed in the Progress Report of 
October 2009. This financing will enable the Co mmission, together with Member States and 
stakeholders, to continue exploratory work rela ting to options for the further development and 
concretisation of the policy, in particular through p ilot actions and studies, along the lines set 
out in the Progress Report of 15 October 2009.6 At the same time, the financing will also 
serve to further develop exchanges of best  practice, improved governance arrangements and 
dialogue with and among stakeholders. 
In its conclusions of  16 November 2009, the General Affa irs Council welcomed the progress 
made so far, as set out in the Progress Re port of the Commissi on, and highlighted the 
importance of funding for the furt her development and implementa tion of the IMP by inviting 
"the Commission to present  the necessary proposals for the financing of integrated maritime 
policy actions within the existing Financial Persp ective, with a view to entry into force by 
2011". 7 
2.2. Problem Definition  
The further development and implementation of an Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) 
during the period of 2011 till 2013 will not be  possible because of a lack of financial 
means to support the necessary actions.  
Preparatory actions, pilot projec ts, studies, and stakeholder dialogue are instrumental in 
assessing the feasibility  and helping to prepare proposals for further activities aimed at 
implementing the IMP. The IMP is a new polic y, with a broad mandate, based on the Blue 
Paper adopted in 2007. Progress so far has been good, as set out in the Progress report of 15 
October 2009, and welcomed by the Council on 16 November.  
As it is clear from the Progress Report and the accompanying working document, while in 
some areas, such as governance arrangements in Member States, changes have already been 
implemented by Member States which increase the ability of Member States and the Union to 
deal in a coherent fashion with matters relating to the sustainable development of coastal regions and maritime sectors, in other, more complex and more technical fields, such as 
surveillance of the sea, maritime spatial planning or the observation of the natural state of the sea, further work of concretisation of options for future policy design is necessary. For this 
purpose, to date, a number of ac tivities, including preparatory ac tions and pilot projects have 
been launched to develop and implement the IMP,  particularly in support of the Integrated 
Maritime Policy cross-cutting instruments such as Maritime Spatial Planning and Integrated 
                                                
 
6 The financial support to the Integrated Maritime Policy will also serve to continue exploratory work 
relating to options for the further development and concretisation of the policy set out in details in the 
following Communications: Communication on Guidelines for an Integrated Approach to Maritime Policy: Towards best practice in integrated mar itime governance and stakeholder consultation - COM 
(2008) 395 of 26.06.2008, Communication on a Ro admap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving 
common principles in the EU - COM(2008) 791 of 25.11.2008, Communication on the European Union and the Arctic Region - COM(2008) 763 of 20.11.2008, Communication on the European Union 
Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region - COM(2009) 248 of 10.06.2009, Communication "Towards an 
Integrated Maritime Policy for better governan ce in the Mediterranean '' - COM (2009)466 of 
11.09.2009, Communication "Towards the integration of maritime surveillance: A common information 
sharing environment for the EU maritime domain - COM(2009)538 of 15.10.2009, Communication on developing the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy of the European Union - 
COM(2009) 536 of 15.10.2009.  
7 GAERC Council Conclusions on Integrated Maritime Policy - Doc. 15175/1/09 (para. 17, page. 6). 
 
EN 4   EN Coastal Zone Management, Integrated Mari time Surveillance and Marine Knowledge and 
Data. These actions are first steps, and on th eir own will not suffice to concretise the policy 
options further in an appropriate fashion. 
Developing and implementing further the Integrated Maritime Policy, requires the 
continuation of the operational work along th e path already initiated on the basis of 
preparatory actions and pilot projects. To cont inue supporting such measures and activities 
which further contribute significantly to the achievement of its overarching objective and 
goals, budgetary resources need to be allocated.  
Until now, IMP actions have been financed on th e basis of Article 49 (6) (a) and (b) of the 
Financial Regulation, and Article 32 of its Implementing Rules which provide for the funding 
of pilot schemes and preparatory actions.8 However, funding for furt her financing Integrated 
Maritime Policy actions for the period 2011-2013 is insufficient,  and thus achieving the given 
objectives is put in question and endangered.  Maritime Policy related pilot projects and 
preparatory actions based on the Financial Regulation provi sions on pilot schemes and 
preparatory actions are to be exhausted at the end of 2010. Thus, pilot schemes and 
preparatory actions relating to the Integrated Maritime Policy can be financed only until the 
end of 2010. 
Therefore, a minimum of financial support for actions and activities aimed at implementing 
the Integrated Maritime Policy for the period from 2011 to 2013 that is until the end of the 
current Financial Perspective, is necessary.  
2.3. Objectives 
2.3.1.  General Objective 
The objective of the Programme is to provide  the legal basis and to ensure a sound and 
adequate financial base for supporting meas ures intended to further promoting the 
development and implementation of the In tegrated Maritime Policy and contributing 
significantly to the achievement of its core overarching objectives , including the promotion, at 
EU and international level, of  integrated maritime governance and coherent and joined up 
decision-making in relation to the oceans, seas , coastal regions and maritime sectors (duly 
taking into account the rationale of the Integr ated Maritime Policy as a policy coordinating 
existing sectoral approaches and creating new in itiatives in areas only where a genuine cross-
sectoral approach is needed9). 
                                                 
8 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/200 6 of 13 December 2006 amending Regulation (EC, 
Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European 
Communities (OJ L 390/2006 of 30 December 2006),  hereinafter referred to as 'the Financial 
Regulation' and Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 478/2007 of 23 April 2007 amending 
Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23.12.2002 laying down detailed rules for the 
implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.  
9 This rationale is set out in particular in the Impact Assessment accompan ying COM(2007) 575 (see 
footnote 2). 
 
EN 5   EN 2.3.2.  Specific objectives 
Actions and activities financed by the proposed Programme will aim to help achieve the 
following specific objectives10: 
– further development and implementation of integrated maritime governance and 
integrated approaches within Member States and coastal regions;  
– speedy and sound implementation of integrat ed sea basin strategies around Europe 
tailored to the needs of each maritime region;  
– further development and implementation of cross-cutting tools for integrated policy-
making including a European Marine Observation and Data Network, a common information sharing environment for the EU maritime domain, Maritime Spatial Planning and Integrated Coastal Zone Management; 
– further defining in the years the boundaries of sustainabil ity of human activities that 
have an impact on the mari ne environment, in the fram ework of the Marine Strategy 
Framework Directive, paying due attention to their cumulative impacts on the basis 
of the ecosystem approach; 
– promotion of the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy by 
improving and fostering dialogue, cooperati on and coordination with third countries, 
including those bordering a European sea ba sin, or actors in th ird countries, as well 
as with international partners and organisa tions on the Integrated Maritime Policy; 
– putting renewed focus on sustainable econom ic growth, employment and innovation; 
– raising the visibility of Maritime Europe, and promoting and facilitating the sharing 
of information, the exchange of best practices, the exploitation and reinforcement of synergies and dialogue with and among st akeholders on maritime governance and 
sectoral policies that have an impact on the oceans, seas and coasts, or the establishment of cross-sectoral cooperati on platforms and networks at a horizontal 
and at sea-basin level. 
2.3.3.  Operational objectives 
The operational objectives of the propos ed Programme should be the following: 
1. Promoting an integrated approach at all levels of maritime governance 
through structural dialogue with Memb er States and coastal regions and 
improving stakeholder involvement in maritime governance by organising specific events, setti ng-up network platforms and hosting 
tools that promote comm unication and feedback. 
2. Laying the foundations of sea-basi n strategies by providing better 
information, identifying legal optio ns for achieving basin objectives, 
                                                
 
10 Commission Progress Report on the EU's Integrated Maritime Policy – COM(2009) 540 final of 
15.10.2009, p. 11-12 and Commission Action Plan accompanying the Communication on an Integrated 
Maritime Policy for the European Union – SEC(2007) 1278 of 10 October 2007. 
 
EN 6   EN assessing the economic, social and envi ronmental impact of these options 
and monitoring progress in implementing action plans. 
3. Developing prototype marine spa tial plans in cross-border areas and 
supporting development of Integrated Coastal Zone Management. 
4. Identifying technical and legislative solutions for better maritime 
surveillance as proposed in the draft Roadmap for the establishment of the Common Information Sharing Environment. 
5. Improving marine knowledge and da ta by setting up (a) a catalogue of 
European marine data collec tions with common formats and 
nomenclature, (b) a set of complete in teroperable layers for European sea 
basins, including the land-sea interf ace, showing where data is being 
collected, and where the gaps are, and providing seamless quality-checked data layers (gridded or pol ygons) for unrestricted public access, 
(c) a user-driven process that determines priorities for the collection and assembly of marine data (d) a data  network which contributes to, and 
builds on, the data for the assessment and monitoring as required by the 
Marine Strategy Framework Direc tive (e.g. physical, biological, 
chemical, human uses of the seas, etc and (e) supporting a network of 
interoperable coastal information systems;  
6. Promoting and fostering integrated maritime policy with international 
partners through specific workshops, seminars, events and conferences; 
7. Supporting actions to define the bounda ries of sustainability of maritime 
activities through the impl ementation of the MSFD, such as for instance 
through the coordination between the different marine regions in implementing the ecosystem approach, the further development of methodological standards on good envi ronmental status, studies on 
marine litter and the so-called plas tic soup and supportive action for pilot 
project regions; 
8. Supporting sustainable economic grow th, employment and innovation by 
actions aimed at unlocking the grow th and employment potential in the 
maritime economy, promoting clean shipping and the upgrading of seafarers’ competences; 
9. enhancing maritime visibility throu gh the European Atlas of the Seas; 
2.4. Available Policy Options 
2.4.1.  No specific action 
Preserving the status quo and ta king no action, in terms of not financing actions and activities 
on the Integrated Maritime Policy for the period 2011-2013, would mean failing to achieve 
the given specific and operational objectives , and hence the general objective of the 
Programme will not be achieved. This, in tur n, would imply that the Commission would not 
deliver on the policy objectives set out in th e Blue Paper of 2007, confirmed in the progress 
report of 2009 and endorsed by the Council on 16 November 2009: 
 
EN 7   EN – The development of integrated maritime governance11 and speedy and sound 
implementation of the sea basin strategies  adopted by the Commission would 
be undermined12. This, in turn, would have a negative impact on the progress in 
promoting communication amongst stakeholders  and their robust and 
constant involvement in the maritime policy-making and governance structure.  
– There would be no progress towa rds the further development and 
implementation of cross-cutting tools for integrated policy-making ; 
(i) There would be no improvement towards the establishment of an 
integrated approach to surveillance of the EU maritime domain  as set 
out in the Commission Communicati on on the integration of maritime 
surveillance of 15 October 200913 namely  through a common information 
sharing environment which will be based on a comprehensive and coherent technical framework for inte roperability and future integration 
of existing maritime surveillance systems across EU borders and sectors aimed at facing the challenges, threats and unlawful activities carried out at sea
14;  
(ii) The further development and implementation of the integrated coastal 
zone management  as well as the development of maritime spatial 
planning along the lines of the Co mmission Communication on a 
Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning15, both of which provide a 
fundamental tool for eco-system ba sed management and sustainable 
development of marine and coastal regions while unleashing significant 
potential for investments would be put at risk and, at least, significantly 
slowed down; 
(iii) The opportunity costs repres ented by the present fragmented marine 
knowledge and data infrastructure  would continue. An impact 
assessment in 200916 indicated that the present fragmentation increases 
the cost of using data by €250 m illion per year and limits opportunities 
for innovation and business expansion worth at least another €60-€200 million per year. Over-engineering to cope with uncertainties in future ocean behaviour costs at least €100 million per year for sea-defences 
alone. Preparatory actions currently underway will not in themselves provide sufficient information for a properly-informed decision to be 
                                                
 
11 Commission Communication on Guidelines for an Inte grated Approach to Ma ritime Policy: Towards 
best practice in integrated maritime governance and stakeholder consultation – COM(2008) 395 of 
26.6.2008. 
12 Commission Communication "Towards an Integrated Maritime Policy for better governance in the 
Mediterranean - COM (2009)466 of 11.09.2009, Commission Communication on the European Union 
and the Arctic Region – COM(2008) of 20.11.2008 and Commission Communication on the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Regi on – COM(2009) 248 of 10.06.2009.  
13 Commission Communication ‘Towards the integration of maritime surveillance: A common 
information sharing environment for the EU maritime domain’- COM (2009) 538 final of 15.10.2009. 
14 See also the Commission’s Communication examining the creation of a Europ ean Border Surveillance 
System (Eurosur)  which is highly relevant in the context of integrated maritime surveillance - 
COM(2008) 68 final. 
15 COM(2008) 791 of 25.11.2008. 
16 Impact Assessment Board Reference Number 2009/MARE/003. 
 
EN 8   EN made in 2013 as to how to create a sustainable marine knowledge 
infrastructure; 
(iv) Lack of awareness of the sea  would continue to ha mper growth. Despite 
the seas' importance for trade, de fence, leisure, energy and the 
environment, Europe is failing to take advantage of new opportunities 
arising from advances in maritime t echnologies and marine research. The 
European Atlas of the Seas (MARATLAS) aims to improve matters by increasing public awareness of the sea,  clarifying the spatial dimension of 
EU policies with an impact on the s ea and developing the identities of 
individual sea-basins. Assembling a nd maintaining its quality-checked 
map-layers and keeping them topical as the seas change and as the EU 
policies evolve will not happen without a continuous effort beyond 2010; 
– The promotion of the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime 
Policy  announced in the Commission Communication on developing the 
international dimension of the Integr ated Maritime Policy of the European 
Union
17 and especially the cooperation, c oordination and dialogue with third 
countries, international part ners and organisations on the Integrated Maritime 
Policy and other maritime issues would be put at risk or, at least, significantly, 
slowed down. This would certainly have  an negative impact on achieving an 
authentic sustainable governance of our oceans and seas and also on 
influencing the international maritime affairs agenda; 
2.4.2.  Modest EU financial contribution  
The present stage of the IMP policy design makes it necessary to further develop and 
concretise options, while allowing first steps of  implementation in relation to a number of 
limited goals, in particular in relation to gove rnance actions. In particular, a modest EU 
financial intervention could contribute significantly to the achievement of the following IMP objectives, priorities and goals as outlined in section 2.3 and set out in the Blue Paper of the Commission of October 2007, and confirmed in th e Progress Report on the EU's Integrated 
Maritime Policy of 15 October 2009. 
2.4.2.1.  Integrated Maritime Governance 
On 26 October 2008, the Commission adopted th e Communication on the "Guidelines for an 
Integrated Approach to Maritime Policy".
18 This Communication advocates the need for the 
promotion of integrated governance throughout th e EU and establishes principles which are 
commonly perceived in maritime governance, incl uding leadership at the national level, the 
role of the regions and stakeholder involveme nt. Moreover, the Integrated Maritime Policy 
Progress Report, adopted by the Commission in October 200919, identifies the enhancement 
of integrated maritime governance as one of the six strategic directions during the next phase 
of the IMP. 
In this context, EU financial intervention coul d contribute to the following actions which are 
also set out in the IMP Progress Report: 
                                                 
17 COM(2009) 536 of 15.10.2009. 
18 COM (2008) 395 of 26.06.08. 
19 COM(2009) 540 final of 15.10.2009 
 
EN 9   EN – encouraging Member States and other players to take steps towards adopting 
an integrated approach to sea-rela ted affairs within their governance 
frameworks, facilitating cooperation and coordination at all level of maritime 
government, intensifying structural dial ogue with Member States and coastal 
regions through decentralised events a nd increasing the ability of Member 
States to deal in a coherent fashion with matters relating to the governance of 
the ocean and seas and the sustainabl e development of coastal regions and 
maritime sectors; this will ensure ups tream policy integration and coherent, 
joined up agendas for maritime affairs; 
– Promoting broad and permanent involveme nt of stakeholders in maritime 
policy-making and enshrining it more permanently in governance structures;  
– Intensifying stakeholder dialogue and robust multi-stakeholder interactions, 
and fostering the creation of cross-sectoral stakeholder communication platforms on maritime affairs as speci fically proposed in the IMP Progress 
Report;  
– Maintaining an internet maritime forum set up in 2009 with a view to allowing 
stakeholders to be aware of marine and maritime information and activities and 
to exchange and disseminate thei r own views and best practice.; 
2.4.2.2.  Activities in relation to the sea basins 
1. The Mediterranean sea-basin  The Mediterranean sea-basin and its specificities call for a joint effort across the basin for the 
improvement of the management of the marine  space and coastal areas. The General Affairs 
Council of the EU in its Conclusions of  16.11.2009 welcomed the IMP approach for the 
Mediterranean and has called for further dialogue and co-operation on the improvement of governance of the marine space and co astal areas in the Mediterranean.
20  
The actions undertaken and promoted as pr oposed in the Comm ission Communication 
"Towards an Integrated Maritime Policy for be tter governance in the Mediterranean - COM 
(2009) 466 of 11.09.2009 will not necessarily be  sufficient to fulfill its objectives.  
In this context, EU financial intervention on th e basis of test projects  and preparatory actions 
could contribute to achieving the foll owing objectives of the Communication: 
– Fostering the development and implem entation of integrated governance of 
maritime and coastal affairs in the Mediterranean; 
– In the context of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and building on 
experience in Integrated Coastal Zone  Management, enabling Mediterranean 
Member States and regional authorities (c oastal regions in particular) to test 
possibilities for further cro ss-border co-operation in the management of their 
marine sub-region and defi ne appropriate mechanisms for integrated maritime 
policy-making at their levels. This will enable the development and testing of 
integrated strategies at sub-regional leve l, and obtain the first concrete results 
                                                 
20 Council Conclusions on Integrated Maritime Policy - Doc. 15175/1/09 (para. 17, page. 4). 
 
EN 10   EN as to what are the challenges at stake, what lessons may be learnt and to what 
extent can such an example be taken up in other Mediterranean sub-regions;  
– Enabling Mediterranean Member States to address specific needs at national 
level (e.g. island concerns, or particular  problems in coastal areas linked to 
tourism and the need for further econom ic growth) through Integrated Coastal 
Zone Management practices and othe r approaches complementary with 
existing provisions of key regional conventions – the Barcelona Convention for the protection of the marine envi ronment and the General Fisheries 
Commission for the Mediterranean; 
– Enabling Mediterranean Member States to address particular needs that require 
co-operating with neighbouring Member St ates or third count ries present in 
specific sub-regions (e.g. in the appropri ate management of marine resources in 
shared sea areas); 
– Enabling Mediterranean Member States to  be able to address wider maritime 
concerns and conflicts at multilateral/regional fora, e.g. maritime safety considerations, and preservation of the marine environment through 
cooperation on the high seas, allowi ng for maximising linkages between 
existing international an d regional conventions active in the region; 
– Allowing for the creation of appropriat e networks across the Mediterranean 
that enable the sharing of informa tion, exchanges of best practice, and 
involvement of stakeholders from the entire basin. 
2. The Black Sea With the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to  the EU in January 2007 and the ongoing pre-
accession process with Turkey, the EU has strengt hened its commitment to fostering further 
cooperation in the region, through the Black Sea Synergy initiative officially launched in 
2008. Sector partnerships are being established in three crucial sectors: envi ronment, transport 
and energy.  
The Danube Strategy currently being develope d upon the request of the Council, in its 
conclusion of 19 June 2009 will equally seek to address the impacts of the Danube on delta 
and possibly the coastal zones of the Black Sea.  
In the next phase, the EU Integrated Mariti me Policy shall seek, where appropriate, to 
contribute to these objectiv es and key initiatives.  
3. The Atlantic sea-basin  The Atlantic Ocean is the second largest of th e world's oceanic divisions and its circulation 
exerts the primary influence on Europe's climate. During the next phase of the Integrated Maritime Policy implementation, EU financ ial intervention would contribute to: 
– setting up a structured dialogue with th e other maritime states and territories 
that share the North Atlantic basin – primarily the United States, Canada and 
Greenland; 
 
EN 11   EN – identifying and resolving issues of con cern in those linked but separate seas 
that wash the westernmost shores of the European continent that together make 
up the north east Atlantic. The Iberian co ast, the Bay of Biscay, the English 
Channel, the Irish Sea and the Celtic Seas are well-recognised waters with 
specific identities but differe nt priorities. This will  be done by listening to 
stakeholder concerns, promoting dial ogue between them, supporting proposals 
for common management a nd planning of the maritime space, setting up 
targets and indicators and id entifying how EU instrume nts can best contribute 
to meeting these targets.; 
4. The Arctic  The Commission Communication
21 on the 'European Union and the Arctic Region' of 20 
November 2008 defined 50 specific proposals for action. These are largely a more efficient 
channelling of existing resources towards th e particular challenges of the Arctic. The 
integrated maritime policy will provide support to  these actions by opening a more structured 
communication channel with indigenous peoples  and assessing the costs and benefits of 
different options for implementation. 
5. The Outermost Regions 
Maritime policy is one of th e four areas for action iden tified by the 2008 Communication 
"Outermost Regions: an asset for Europe"22 which proposes a change of paradigm from 
"handicapped regions" to “regions  of opportunity”. Waters such as the Caribbean and Indian 
Ocean are very different to those surrounding th e European continent.  Within the maritime 
policy efforts will be made to identify the applicability of new emerging maritime 
technologies in the particular waters around outermost regions. 
6. The Baltic Sea and the North Sea EU financial intervention would contribute  to supporting regional implementation of the 
Integrated Maritime Policy in the Baltic
23 and North Sea basins, by allowing for 
commissioning studies, organisatio n of stakeholder forums, and setting up of structured 
dialogue and co-operation with coastal States outside the EU (Russian Federation and 
Norway). Such activities would provide the Commission with expert advice on identifying 
issues of common concern in the respective sea basins, assessing actions taking place and 
identifying options for future action. 
2.4.2.3.  Tools for Integrated Policy-Making 
1. Integrated Mari time Surveillance  
In its Communication on the In tegrated Maritime Policy for the European Union, the 
European Commission undertook to "take steps to wards a more interoperable surveillance 
system to bring together existing monitoring and tracking systems used for maritime safety 
                                                 
21 COM(2008) 763 of 20.11.08. 
22 COM (2008) 642 of 24.10.08. 
23 COM(2009) 248 of 10.6.2009. The EU Strategy fo r the Baltic Sea region was adopted by the GAERC 
Council on 26 October 2009 and by the European Council on 30 October 2009. 
 
EN 12   EN and security, protection of the marine environment, fisheries control, control of external 
borders and other law enforcement activities." 24 
The General Affairs Council of 8 Decembe r 2008 encouraged the Commission to work 
towards interoperability between national and Co mmunity systems so as to increase the cost 
effectiveness of maritime surveillance operations. This approach towards further integration of maritime surveillance was confirmed in the roadmap for the development of the European 
Border Surveillance System (EUROSUR), whic h foresees the gradual creation of a Common 
Information Sharing Environment for the EU maritime domain,
25 as well as in the recent 
updating of the Community ve ssel traffic monitoring and information system.26 
The General Affairs Council of the EU in its Conclusions of 17.11.2009, supported the idea of 
establishing an integrated approach to mar itime surveillance, through a common information 
sharing environment in order to promote more in teroperability and make best use of existing 
systems on a cross-sectoral basis.27 It also urged the Commissi on, in close c ooperation with 
the Member States, to improve coordination between different sectors in the field of maritime surveillance, and to give priority to the development of a general framework, including 
common standards and protocols to  ensure efficient and cost-effective interoperability and 
adaptability of existing systems , taking into account the international standards being 
developed for information sharing amongst different sectors, where appropriate,
 as well as the 
experiences gained from releva nt projects and research. The Commission was also called to 
present to the Council a Roadmap, including a step by step approach, for the development and implementation of the common information shar ing environment, before the end 2010, to be 
further detailed in 2011 to take into account the results from several cross sectoral and cross-
border projects and R&D projects in particular the pilot projec ts and lessons learnt from 
ESDP operations. 
It is on that basis that the integrated maritime surveillance architecture will be built. Since all 
those surveillance systems already exist or will  become operational in the immediate future as 
a result, in most cases, of EU initiative, the ap proach will be to focus on the development of 
common standards to ensure their interoperability, while in para llel addressing legal obstacles 
in the unhindered excha nge of maritime surveillance information.  
Against this background, EU financial contri bution, on the basis of studies conducted through 
public procurements contracts and/or admini strative agreement with the Joint Research 
Centre, aimed at developing an In tegrated Maritime Surveillance
28 will be necessary for: 
                                                 
24 COM (2007) 575 final of 10.10.2007, 6. 
25 COM(2008) 68 final of 13.2.2008, 9. Report on Progress made in developing EUROSUR, Commission 
staff working paper, SEC(2009)1265final of 24.09.2009. 
26 Directive 2009/17/EC amending Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community monitoring and  
 information system, OJ L131, 28 5 2009, 101. Equally relevant is Regulation (EC) No 725/2004 of 31  
 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port facility security, OJ L129, 29.4.2004, 6. 
27 Council Conclusions on Integrated Maritime Policy of 16 November 2009 - Doc. 15175/1/09 (para. 17, 
page. 4) and Council Conclusions on Integration of Maritime Surveillance of 17 November 2009 - Doc. 
15176/2/09. 
28 The Commission’s Communication ‘Towards the integration of maritime surveillance: A common 
information sharing environment for the EU maritime domain’- COM (2009) 538 final of 15.10.2009 
lays down four guiding principles towards the development of the integrated maritime surveillance backbone, i.e. the Common Information Sharing Environment: (i) An approach interlinking all user 
communities, (ii) Building a technical framework for interoperability and future integration, (iii) 
Information exchange between civilian and military authorities, (iv) Specific legal provisions.   
 
EN 13   EN – strengthening the maritime surveillance information sharing among the 
different sectoral authorit ies at national and EU leve l, enhancing the users' 
maritime awareness picture. The benef its to flow from this process will 
positively affect national security, maritime security and safety, the protection of the marine environment, border cont rol and, in general, law enforcement 
because national authorities will have mo re information, notably that collected 
for other purposes, to carry out their duties; 
– ensuring a unity of effort across entitie s with maritime interests by avoiding 
duplications in the collection of informa tion and thereby considerably reducing 
the financial costs for all actors involved. This rationalisation will benefit end users and diminish implementation burden on Member States.  
– the common information sharing envir onment will ensure that EU systems 
collecting maritime surveillance data ar e interconnected by means of the most 
appropriate technical solutions; 
The Communication on the Integrated Maritime Polic y for the European Union states that the 
Community system SafeSeaNet (SSN) should be  used by all relevant  communities and be 
developed further to function as the main pl atform for information exchange in the EU 
maritime domain with regard to port arrival and departure notifications, notifications of 
dangerous goods, maritime security notificatio ns, incident and accident information, AIS, 
LRIT and pollution monitoring. 
The evolution of SSN is theref ore linked with the establishment of an efficient integrated 
maritime surveillance architecture, particularly  in view of necessary improvements to the 
system in order to ensure access for other categories of users.  
On that basis the EU financial contribution will be necessary in order to asses the legal 
implications and technical impact of opening up SSN to other users, particularly in the 
context of the impact analysis for the revi sion of the relevant Community legislation
29.  
2. Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) and Inte grated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) 
Maritime spatial planning and Integrated Coas tal Zone Management provide fundamental 
tools for eco-system based management and su stainable development of marine areas and 
coastal regions.30 EU financial intervention will be necessary for: 
– the continued development, implementati on and sharing of practical experience 
of MSP and ICZM  at EU level;  
– contributing to a common approach to MSP and ICZM, which is necessary for 
it to be effective in a cro ss-border context; It thus he lps to avoid or minimise 
conflicts and hence reduces th e cost of non-coordination; 
                                                 
29 Directive 2002/59/EC establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system, as 
amended 
30 Commission Progress Report on the EU's Integrated Maritime Policy – COM(2009) 540 final of 
15.10.2009, p. 6. 
 
EN 14   EN – demonstrating in concrete terms an MSP pr ocess in specified seas that is shared 
by two or more Member States, includi ng coherence to on-shore planning and 
coastal zone management activities where appropriate; 
– contributing to the development of  MSP methodologies, expertise and 
conceptual understanding of MSP in th e Member States, and model common 
approaches and recommendations, by testi ng in practice the ke y principles of 
MSP that are needed to regulate multiple uses from multiple perspectives. This will promote the idea of building-up a platform on MSP experts; 
– serving to continue the dialogue among responsible authorities and concerned 
stakeholders on a cross-border, cross-sect oral basis. This will promote cross-
border cooperation on MSP and IC ZM and enhance transparency; 
– contributing to the development of co mmon approaches in the sea basins 
shared with third countries, which w ill be a building block for continued 
cooperation and in order to avoid conflicts in a later stage, providing opportunities for EU Member States to  learn from experiences in non-EU 
countries. 
3. Marine Knowledge and Data 
It is now well-known that the rhythms and cy cles of the marine world influence human 
activity in a multitude of ways. The magnitude of future changes in oceanic systems, their impact on human activity and the feedbacks on the ocean from these changes in human 
behaviour cannot be forecast without understand ing the way the system works now and how it 
worked in the past. Scientists, regulators a nd commercial bodies need  reliable observations 
and data if they are to contribute towards a sustainable development of the maritime economy 
The challenge is to develop a system that will allow a better identification of what is being 
collected, that will facilitate access to coherent  data sets, that will permit the recognition of 
data gaps and that will shape a data collection and monitoring infrastructure directly suited to 
multiple applications 
The EU financial intervention will build on what has been achieved in the preparatory actions 
and take further steps towards the comprehens ive and coherent marine data and knowledge 
base. In particular, as indicated in the specific impact assessment undertaken in 2009
16, such 
an intervention will contribute to: 
– ensuring a better marine data measurement infrastructure which is a necessary 
condition for reducing uncertainty in th e sea's behaviour for those working on 
marine and maritime matters by f acilitating the sharing, re-use and 
dissemination of marine da ta and knowledge to indus try, public authorities and 
the research EU. Reducing the uncertain ty in sea-level rise by 25% alone 
would save public authorities approximately €100 million per year31. This will 
allow more certainty for business and public authorities in planning for the 
future;  
                                                 
31 The final version of the Impact Assessment on the European Marine Observation and Date Network is 
under preparation following comments of the Impact Assessment Board in November 2009. 
 
EN 15   EN – promoting and increasing competition amongst users of marine data for value 
added products delivered from the available data. Under non-restrictive 
conditions, more public and private opera tors will find it easier to enter the 
market for the development of added value products. This will provide wider access to quality-checked, rapidly-available coherent marine data and hence stimulate the development of new innova tive services wher eas it may also 
increase largely employment in the private sector; 
– increasing operational efficiency by re ducing operational costs and delays for 
those who use marine data. This, in tu rn, will increase productivity, stimulate 
research and innovation and render the users of the data more competitive;  
– assisting Member States to meet obliga tions to the Marine Framework Strategy 
Directive 2008/56/EC of 17 June 2008  under conditions of better knowledge of 
the coverage of the pr esent observation network
32; 
– promoting synergies between efforts at an European level with those 
undertaken by international partners; 
– providing operational experience and suffi cient information that is needed if 
the Commission is to decide whether a nd how to move forward with a fully 
operational European Marine Observ ation and Data Network (EMODNET). 
2.4.2.4.  Promoting Europe's Leadership in Inte rnational Maritime Affairs International 
dimension of the IMP 
The Commission Communication on developing the international di mension of the Integrated 
Maritime Policy33 sets up the means to promote Europe's  leadership in international maritime 
affairs, enhance the impact of the EU at mu ltilateral level, strengthen regional cooperation 
with neighbouring countries in shared sea basins , and to develop and ex tend bilateral relations 
with key partners. In this context, a fi nancial contribution from the EU budget would 
contribute to: 
– deepening the Commission's relations with the international partners 
(administrations and stakeholders) w ho recognise the value-added of an 
integrated approach to protect ocean s and seas and use their resources 
sustainably to sustain gr owth in coastal regions , providing a platform for 
alliance building, promoting mutual unde rstanding and enab ling the exchange 
of best practice.34  
– enhancing the structured dialogue with key partners, such as China, Russia, 
Japan, Canada and US, and also with  our neighbouring countries, in full 
complementarity with existing bilateral and regional frameworks in place, with 
                                                 
32 Article 11 of the Marine Framework Strategy Directive stipulates that "Monitoring programmes shall be 
compatible within marine regions or subregions". 
33 COM (536) 2009 final. 
34 The Commission intends to gradually expand the scope of sectoral dialogues into a more overarching 
cooperation on global maritime affairs, which would focus on the cross-cutting tools such as maritime surveillance, marine knowledge, integrated costal zones management and marine technology 
development. Themes on the agenda of coming multilateral meetings will be given priority, to promote 
mutual support and where possible develop joint initiatives. 
 
EN 16   EN the aim of having an exchange of best  practices and influential role in 
designing thei r policies; 
– improving the EU's visibility in the maritime affairs field by facilitating an 
active participation and presence in international meetings (organisation of side-events and workshops). Those activi ties could be jointly  organised with 
third parties (e.g. governments or intern ational bodies) or exclusively by the 
EU with the third c ountries participation.
35 In doing so, the EU will be able to 
exert stronger influence in international debate on maritime issues to safeguard its economic interests and enhance prot ection of the marine environment.  
2.4.2.5.  Defining the boundaries of sustainabili ty of maritime activities through the 
implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive 
The objective of the Directive is to achieve  good environmental status in the marine 
environment by the year 2020 through necessary  measures taken by Member States. The 
marine strategies which will be developed in the framework of the Directive shall apply an 
ecosystem-based approach to the management of  human activities, ensuring that the collective 
pressure of such activities is kept within levels compatible with the achievement of good 
environmental status and that the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced 
changes is not compromised, while enabling the sustainable use of mari ne goods and services 
by present and future generations. After the in itial assessment of the current environmental 
status and the environmental impacts of human  activities thereon, a first step is the 
determination of what good enviro nmental status is and the establishment of a series of 
environmental targets and associated indicators . Member States shari ng a marine region or 
subregion shall cooperate to ensure that the preparation, including the initial assessment and 
the GES determination are coherent and coordinated. 
In this context, a financial contributi on from the EU budget would contribute to: 
– the further development of methodol ogical standards on good environmental 
standards, in particular the accumulation of impacts;  
– providing a platform for regional conve ntions at which consistent and 
comparable methodologies for assessi ng the environmental status and 
determination of GES are discussed and exchanged  
– as an emerging new field, studies on monitoring, assessing and develop 
measures on marine litter and associated 'plastic soup'; 
– develop supportive actions  for pilot projects in marine regions.  
                                                
 
35 The Commission will work towards creating a working group/ ad-hoc group in the OECD as a forum 
for discussing maritime affairs. The aim is that l eaders in integrated appro ach could push integration 
and new governance forward, and develop together new synergies, efficiencies and best practices in 
Integrated Maritime Policy development and implementation. This could create a higher sense of ownership in the international EU and would facilitate  the exchange of best practices with respect to 
integrated maritime management. This would bring an added value on the further development of our 
policy but also ensure coherence to the political aims of our key partners.  
 
EN 17   EN 2.4.2.6.  Sustainable economic growth, employment and innovation 
A modest EU financial contribution will prov ide a clear source of funding for financing 
actions, activities and measures pursued with rega rd to the promotion of the sustainable use of 
the marine and coastal resources and su stainable economic growth, innovation and 
employment in maritime sectors and coasta l regions. In particul ar, such a financial 
intervention could form the foundation for: 
– supporting coordinated implementation of a set of integrated initiatives and 
actions taken by different Commission se rvices, in areas only where a genuine 
cross-sectoral approach is needed, aimed at reducing the environmental impact of a range of maritime activities on the oc eans, seas and coasts. To this end, 
supporting actions on clean shipping which in cludes a set of measures aimed at 
reducing the environmental impact of maritime transport are particular cases in point (i.e. actions on clean shipping in the context of the Baltic Sea Region 
Strategy
36); 
– fostering activities which enhance the attractiveness of the maritime 
professions and raise the quali ty and skills of seafarers; 
– actively developing measures on EU le vel that can help in unlocking the 
growth and employment potential in the maritime economy in the broadest 
sense, in line with the objectives formul ated in President Barroso's political 
guidelines.37 
2.4.2.7.  Raising the Visibility  of Maritime Europe 
A financial contribution of the EU budget will raise the visibility of Maritime Europe by: 
– enhancing an information technology infrastructure and assembling and 
maintaining quality checked map-layers with the purpose of increasing public 
awareness of the sea, clarifying the spat ial dimension of EU policies with an 
impact on the sea and coasts, and devel oping the identities of individual sea-
basins, and allowing stakeholders to de bate on issues of common interest and 
to disseminate information on their activ ities to wider audience This will 
ensure effective and well-functioning vi sualisation of maritime information 
through web-based tools such as th e European Atlas of the Seas.   
2.4.3.  Fully fledged financing  
Alternatively, one should consider both the status quo, which amounts to the no action option, 
and the limited EU financial contribution as un satisfactory, envisaging a broad and fully 
fledged financial intervention of substantial higher amounts than those proposed. A fully 
fledged financing would provide a stable, adequate and clear s ource of funding for the further 
development and implementation of the IMP policy and would increase the likelihood of 
achieving efficiently the above-mentioned objectiv es, goals and priorities of Integrated 
                                                 
36 Communication on the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region – COM(2009)248 
of 10.06.2009  
37 Political guidelines for the next Commission by José Manuel Barroso, p.25 
 
EN 18   EN Maritime Policy for the period 2011-2013 based on the larger work ite ms pursued under the 
Integrated Maritime Policy heading since 2007.  
However, this option should be discarded because at this stag e of development of the policy, 
substantially higher amounts than  those envisaged could not be disbursed, given that neither 
Member States nor the Commission already have  concrete and fully-d eveloped policy design 
options for taking-up such amounts. 
2.4.4.  Comparison of options  
The comparison of the options of the present evaluation was based on the following criteria: 
– The effectiveness of each option in reaching given objectives and 
corresponding benefits;  
– The feasibility of the selected options;  
– The cost implication for the EU budget; 
The criteria used for the comparison of options are considered equally im portant in testing the 
cost-effectiveness as well as the likely results and impacts of each option. However, the 
criterion of achievement of the objectives features more prominentl y. With this in mind, the 
criteria have been prioriti sed, rather than weighted. 
 
EN 19   EN The major findings are compared in the below table: 
ASSESSMENT  
 
  
 
  
OPTIONS
 Effectiveness in 
reaching given 
objectives and 
corresponding 
benefits  
  
High (+++) 
Medium (+/-) Low (---) Feasibility
 
 
  
 
High (+) Medium 
(+/-) 
Low (-) Cost implication for EU budget
 
 
 
 
 
Positive 
(+to+++) 
Negative 
(-to---) Overall 
Assessment  
  
 
Positive (+to+++) 
Negative 
(-to---)  
Option 1  
No specific action --- + Appropriations - 
Human Resources -  
Administrative exp. -  - 
Option 2  
Modest EU 
financial 
contribution +++ + Appropriations + 
Human Resources +  
Administrative exp. +  + 
Option 3  
Fully fledged 
financing  +++ - Appropriations +++ 
Human Resources ++ 
Administrative exp. ++ 
 - 
2.4.4.1.  No specific action (Option 1):  
Option 1  is clearly feasible and ther e would be no cost implicati on for the EU budget. On the 
other hand, taking no further action, in terms of  not financing actions and activities on the 
Integrated Maritime Policy for the period 2011-2013, would mean failing to achieve the given 
general and specific objec tives of the Programme.  
This, in turn, would imply that the Commission would not deliver on the policy objectives set 
out in its Blue Paper of Oct ober 2007, as confirmed in the Pr ogress report of October 2009 
and endorsed by the General Affairs Council co nclusions of 16 November 2009. This failure 
is sufficient to rule out Option 1.  
The potential economic, environmental and social  results and impacts expected from Option 1 
have been set out in section 2.4.1 "no action". 
 
EN 20   EN 2.4.4.2.  Modest EU financial co ntribution (Option 2):  
This does have an impact on the EU budget. On the other hand, Option 2 presents several 
advantages. First of all, it would contribute significantly to the achievement of the given 
objectives outlined in section 2.3. It would allow the EU to continue exploring options for the 
further development of the IMP and to begin implementing through concre te action in certain 
areas.  It will thus ensure the sound and speedy  implementation of th e Integrated Maritime 
Policy in the short to long term.  
In particular Option 2 is consistent with the General Affairs Counc il Conclusions of 16 
November 2009 which confirmed the validity of the integrated approach to maritime affairs and invited the Commission to present the necessa ry proposals for the financing of integrated 
maritime policy actions within the existing Financ ial Perspective, with a view to entry into 
force by 2011
 38. Especially, in the context of the imp act of climate change and the current 
economic crisis which is particularly felt in the maritime sector, Option 2 will contribute to keeping the momentum in the unfolding of th e Integrated Maritime Policy addressing the 
essential mid- and long-term challenges of environmental protection, maritime safety and 
security, economic growth, qua lity jobs and well-being.
39 
Option 2 is a feasible and cost-effective option. DG-MARE will be able to administer the 
programme with no additional staff compared to those currently managing the pilot project 
and preparatory actions. The budget requested is a modest increase compared to what has 
been spent up to now on these pilo t projects and preparatory actions. 
The potential economic, social and environmenta l results and impacts expected from EU 
financial intervention in the field of Inte grated Maritime Policy shall be as follows: 
– Integrated Maritime Governance  
The Integrated Maritime Policy facilita tes innovation, new synergies and an 
increased coherence of actio n through the development of  new instruments for an 
integrated governance, both in relation to  policy making and execution of policies, 
whether on the levels of regions, Me mber States, the EU or globally. 
Following the Guidelines to Member States on an integrated approach to maritime 
policy, published by the Commission in June 200840, Member States endorsed the 
value of sharing information and learning fr om best practice. They are increasingly 
applying integrated approaches, e.g. through national strategies, such as in France, 
Portugal or Germany, specific initiatives, su ch as the UK Marine Bill or the Irish 
science strategy, inter-ministerial coordina tion, such as in France, the Netherlands 
and Greece or integrated stakeholder dialogue , e.g. Portugal. Maritime regions, such 
as Schleswig-Holstein and Brittany, have drawn up regional maritime strategies and initiatives are being taken towards integr ated governance at sea-basin level, for 
example in the Channel, the Irish Sea and the Baltic. 
EU financial intervention would have a str ong impact on the quali ty of dialogue with 
and among Member States, coastal regi ons on maritime affairs, and thereby 
                                                
 
38 Council Conclusions on Integrated Maritime Policy - Doc. 15175/1/09 (page. 6, para. 17,).  
39 Council Conclusions on Integrated Maritime Policy - Doc. 15175/1/09 (page. 2, para. 17).   
40 COM(2008) 395 final of 26.06.2008. 
 
EN 21   EN improving stakeholder involvement in maritime governance. It would allow the 
newly created self-organised overarching platform of maritime stakeholders to 
establish appropriate working standards and allow the Commission to better channel discussions with differe nt stakeholders groups. 
– Sea-basin strategies
 
Although sea-basin strategies are the core  of the integrated maritime policy, the 
potential economic impact of a more cohere nt approach to EU policy implementation 
on a sea-basin scale is not yet known. Indeed  some of the studies and consultations 
planned during this period aim to assess more  precisely what that impact might be. 
Concerning the Arctic one current study is looking at the lega l and administrative 
framework for Arctic Shipping and its possible implications for Arctic maritime transport. 
The focus on sea-basins will create a better  awareness of the opportunities offered by 
the maritime domain in each particular sea ba sin and of an identity that is shared 
across national borders. 
The Marine Framework Strategy Directive is  built on the axiom that the sea-basin is 
the natural unit for managi ng and monitoring Europe's seas. Setting up coherent 
networks of marine protected areas also re lies on a cross-border sea-basin approach. 
Planning on a sea-basin scale will therefore contribute towards realising the aims of 
these measures. 
– Integrated Maritime Surveillance
 
The financial impact of setting up the co mmon information sharing environment can 
only be assessed once the Commission ha s proposed and the Member States 
endorsed a roadmap for its establishment. This is foreseen by end 2010. Following 
this, the Commission will by end 2013, at the Council's request, identify the financial resources potentially needed for the materi alisation of the integration of maritime 
surveillance, which means in practical terms the implementation of the CISE (Common Information Sharing Environmen t), its management and its further 
possible development to the benefit of ot her relevant services. A full financial 
assessment will accompany the Impact Assessm ent that will be carried out in the 
beginning of 2013. The amounts foreseen for th e integration of maritime surveillance 
under this Regulation will cover the period 2011-2013. They will finance the 
acquisition of the necessary knowledge to be able to identify and quantify the 
components of the common information sharing environment.  
It can however be stated that making existing sectoral surveillance systems (military 
included) available to other sectors that need the information, will avoid duplications 
in data collection. By making best use of existing systems, such as the Community 
vessel traffic monitoring and information sy stem (SafeSeaNet), instead of creating 
additional sectoral systems, in particular  when they are intended for gathering the 
same data is a cost effective option. Fu rthermore, additional  investments should 
ensure that maritime surveillance is enhan ced in a uniform manner, while at the same 
time making sure that certain critical areas are particularly and sufficiently covered 
by surveillance. The evolution of SafeSaNet and its operation in the broader context of the integrated maritime surveillance s hould be studied caref ully in order to 
 
EN 22   EN provide the more efficient sharing of da ta regarding port ar rival and departure 
notifications, notifications of dangerous  goods, maritime security notifications, 
incident and accident information, AIS, LRIT and pollution monitoring. In this 
perspective, an impact assessment of the le gal and technical implications will need to 
be undertaken by the Commission in the co ntext of the revision of the relevant 
Community Directive. 
Other options instead of integrating mar itime surveillance would be that Member 
States use EU and national funding to invest at large scale in additional assets like ships, helicopters, planes, satellite systems and infrastructure etc or to considerably 
increase the number of operational personne l carrying control of maritime safety, 
security, borders, customs, fisheries and obs ervation of the marine environment. The 
additional costs for recruiting further sta ff would have to be borne by the national 
budget of the Member States concerned, ne glecting the aspect of solidarity and 
burden-sharing among Member States. Furthe rmore, simply increasing the staff of 
national control author ities would not contribute to a more efficient cooperation 
amongst Member States and at EU level.  
An integrated approach to maritime survei llance should improve the effectiveness of 
the authorities responsible fo r maritime activities by maki ng available more tools and 
more information necessary for the perfor mance of their dutie s. Additionally, EU 
financial support for some targeted actions  would benefit from information gathered 
by other EU systems and result in more efficient operations and reduced operating 
costs. This is very important, given th e growing need to detect, identify, track, 
intercept and apprehend individuals enga ging in smuggling, trafficking in human 
beings, illegal fishing, clandestine immigrati on, as well as to prevent accidents at sea 
and the safeguard of the environment. 
Cost-efficiency would be achieved by enabli ng (a) targeted patrolling of the vast EU 
maritime areas in order to enforce maritime safety and security as well as fisheries legislation, (b) more successful search and rescue operations, (c) prompt and 
geographically identified initiation of clean-up operations in case of marine 
pollution, (d) interception of fast mischievous crafts carrying out il licit trafficking of 
human beings, drugs or smuggling. The option of a modest EU fi nancial contribution 
will also have positive effects on Member St ates administrative structures, due to the 
enhanced cooperation mechanisms that w ould be developed be tween the different 
national authorities, serving also the ai m of improved maritime governance which is 
one of the fundamental objectives of th e integrated maritime policy. Apart from 
general operational costs, administrative cost s associated with na tional operational 
means will also be reduced through their targeted deployment.  
Positive economic impacts include better protection of the EU and Member States 
economic and security interests from illegal activities at sea, eff ective enforcement of 
customs legislation through maritime traffic and ship movement information available to National Single Windows, as  well as by the promotion of the EU 
common maritime space without barriers. So cial and environmental will be derived 
by targeted patrolling of the huge EU maritime areas. 
 
EN 23   EN – Maritime Spatial Planning and Integrated Coastal Zone Management  
The development of maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal zone 
management will contribute to  the continued development, implementation and 
sharing of best practices and practical experience of MSP  and ICZM  at EU level, 
leading to economic benefits, unleashing si gnificant potential for investments by 
providing a stable planning fr amework that creates certain ty for investors, smoother 
implementation of environmental legislati on such as the Marine Strategy Framework 
Directive and Habitats and Birds Directiv es, improved and therefore more efficient 
governance, growth and jobs generation and improved sustainability by providing an 
ecosystem-based tool for reconciling econom ic uses of the seas on the one hand and 
the protection of the marine environment on the other. In addition, a common 
approach to MSP to be deve loped with the help of EU financial intervention, which 
is necessary for it to be effective in a cross-border context, will contribute to the 
avoidance or minimisation of conflicts betw een competing uses of the marine space, 
thus reducing the cost of non-coordination. 
– Marine knowledge and data  
Not all of the shortcomings of the presen t marine knowledge infrastructure identified 
in section 2.4.1 "no specific action" w ould be overcome through option 2. This 
would require a longer timescale than  the 3 years cove red by the proposed 
Regulation. 
The impact assessment for marine knowledge established that a complete 
implementation of a new marine knowledge architecture without any increase in 
observational infrastructure would save €300 million per year in reduced operational costs to industry, public au thorities and industry and w ould stimulate the economy by 
generating €60 million - €200 million per y ear in new innovative services. A 
minimum of €20 million per year would be saved through reduced uncertainty in 
parameters such as sea-level rise (sea-defence safety margins do not need to be so wide). Further savings would come from i nvestment in more measurements but this 
will not be proposed till it is clearer wher e more measurement will bring increased 
benefit. The partial implementation of su ch an architecture within the timeframe 
2011-2013 will not only allow a better decision to be made as to how such an architecture should be implemented but will itself realise some of these benefits. 
Indeed some quick gains can  be made. During this period many of the chemical 
pollution parameters required for assessing environmental status should be available 
through ur-EMODnet and the creation of a one-stop shop for medium resolution 
bathymetric data of European seas will benefit a wide range of users. It will also contribute to faster delivery of data. If a request for data can be met within a few 
days, it may be worth having. If it would ta ke a few weeks, then the user may give 
up. Assuming that the marine knowledge architecture constructed during the 2011-
2013 period is maintained af terwards then we can assume an economic benefit of 
€60 million per year. 
By facilitating access to existi ng data, there will be less ne ed to conduct new surveys. 
For instance sonars can disturb marine mammals. Furthermore better marine data 
will allow a more accurate assessment of  environmental impact of proposed new 
activities. 
 
EN 24   EN The main social impact of this option, ot her than the increase in jobs which has 
already been considered under "economic im pact", is an empowerment of individual 
stakeholders with limited financial resources. Easier access to data will allow them to 
contribute to the debate about options fo r development in their neighbouring coast 
and seas. 
– Defining the boundaries of sustainability  of maritime activities through the  
 implementation of the Marine  Strategy Framework Directive  
The elements preformed under this task w ill contribute to the continued development 
and implementation of methodological stan dards which are associated with good 
environmental status (GES) of  the marine environment. The exchange and sharing of 
best practices and practical experience at a pan EU platform accelerates the 
standardization of these methodologies and provide opportunities for comparison 
between regional seas. This facilitates th e whole process of determining GES by MS 
in respect of each marine region. As a result, this will lead to efficiency of efforts 
which are executed at EU and MS level.  
A new and emerging issue is the appearance of  litter in the marine environment. This 
includes the so-called plastic soup which app ears at high seas, notably the Pacific but 
similar problems could be in the Atlantic . The difficulty with marine litter is its 
multiple origins and the potentially larg e impacts both on the environment and the 
economy. Studying the origin of  litter (i.e. from cargo, recreation, fisheries, land-
based urban or industrial waste) and defining possible measures are only the 
beginning of tackling this global problem. The EU has to play its role and take up its 
responsibility in the interna tional context to contribute to  addressing this issue.  
Marine strategies which are going to be developed under the MSFD, will be 
reviewed regularly in order to deal with changed circumstances such as 
environmental status, change in uses a nd changes due to climate change. This 
approach can be demonstrated in a p ilot project as a showcase of adaptive 
management. 
– Raising the Visibility of Maritime Europe  
Jobs at sea, particularly at the officer level, are rewarding in terms of intellectual 
challenge and also financially. An apprentices hip at sea is an ideal start to a career 
that could move afterwards to onshore jobs in related se ctors such as logistics or 
insurance. Yet there is a shortage at a global and European le vel of trained ships 
officers41. In the UK it is one of the professions still open for immigrants. A greater 
awareness of maritime Europe and the opport unities it offers is not a sufficient 
condition for increasing this number but it is a necessary and relatively cheap one. 
The proposed annual expenditure on raising the profile of maritime Europe is less 
than 0.1% of the pay that would accrue to  Europeans if the current shortage of 
European merchant navy officers were a ddressed. There are si milar shortages in 
other maritime activities. Finland, Unite d Kingdom, The Netherlands and Denmark 
are set to lose over 20% of their employees in the next ten to fifteen years due to 
                                                 
41 Stena Bulk, the Swedish oil tanker company estimate s that there are vacancies  for 10000 officers in 
Europe and 40000 globally. 
 
EN 25   EN retirement. It is estimated that 11,000 skilled new entrants to the industry will be 
needed each year42. Again visibility is not the only  action required; more targeted 
education is necessary. But without an  awareness of maritime opportunities, 
prospective students are not going to  embark on the necessary training. 
Economic and social impact is linked. Increa sed employment at sea and an enhanced 
status for those engaged in maritime activ ities will improve the life of the coastal 
communities where those engaged in maritime professions generally live. 
Enhanced knowledge of the maritime world and the state of the marine environment 
amongst those directly involved is not enough to ensure proper environmental 
management. This information needs to be disseminated amongs t those who vote in 
local, regional and national elections in  order to ensure that environmental 
sustainability remains a priority for all administrations. 
– Sustainable economic growth, employment and innovation  
President Barroso has pointed to the oceans a nd seas as a future engine of growth in 
his political guidelines for the current Commission mandate43. The maritime sector 
also received particular attention in the "Consultation on the Future "EU 2020" 
Strategy"44. 
The next phase of the EU's Integrated Mari time Policy, therefore, needs to underpin 
the strengths of the current maritime segments as well as emerging markets insofar as they represent real and significant growth opportunities for Europe. This can be done 
by identifying the untapped future potential of cutting-edge marine and maritime technologies, resources and services as drivers for new innovations, competitiveness 
and, ultimately, growth and jobs.  
Based on existing and projected areas of kno wledge where Europe is in the lead, 
work can focus on providing the right framework for marine-based and maritime innovation and technological de velopment as a basis for gr owth and jobs in one or 
several sectors, and even in non-mar itime industries through enabling and cross-
cutting technologies. 
In the face of the economic crisis wh ich is affecting the maritime economy in 
particular, new and additional activities mu st be pursued in order to help the 
maritime sectors emerge strengthened from the crisis. 
2.4.4.3.  Fully fledged financing (Option 3)  
This Option presents  the advantage of helping considerab ly the Commission to achieve the 
given IMP policy objectives and priorities outlin ed in section 2.3. On the other hand, Option 3 
is not politically feasible becau se at this stage of IMP development, it would not be possible 
to disburse substantially higher amounts than those already envisaged. This is because neither 
                                                
 
42 Demographic Change & Skills Requirements in the European Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Industry” 
Report by European Metalworkers’ Federation (EMF) and the Community of European Shipyards’ Associations (CESA), 2008  
43 http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/president/pdf/press_20090903_EN.pdf  
44 COM(2009) 647 final of 24.11.2009. 
 
EN 26   EN Member States nor the Commi ssion already have concrete policy design options at hand 
allowing for substantially higher disbursement in  most areas. In those areas where preliminary 
designs are under preparation - eg a fully financed surveill ance or an EMODNET service – 
indications are that the amount of financing required is more  than the likely availability of 
budget at this time. Nor does the Commission have the human resources to manage this fully-fledged financing. Furthermore, it woul d be unwise to embark on a fully-fledged 
implementation without first testing the concepts on a more limited scale.  
Consequently, taking into account the limita tions of options 1 and 3 and the strong 
Community interest in achieving the IMP's obj ectives in the short to medium term, the 
appropriate solution would seem to be a m odest EU financial contribution to fund IMP 
activities on the Integrated Mari time Policy for the period 2011-2013.  
2.4.5.  Instruments and Method of Implemen tation for the selected option  
In the light of the objectives to be achieved  by the EU funding Programme, financial support 
from the EU budget to the Integrated Maritime Policy can  be provided via  grants for actions 
and operating grants, public procurement contr acts and administrative agreements with the 
Joint Research Centre.  
It is considered that  the funding concerning cross-cutting tools for Integrated Maritime 
Policy-making and cross-sectoral maritime activ ities could be best addressed by targeted 
financing of specific projects via grants for an  action. This is mostly the case with actions 
related to integrated maritime surveillance, maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal zone management and for certain  activities within the marine knowledge area. In the case of 
activities carried out by stakeholde rs with a view to pursuing one or more of the objectives of 
the Integrated Maritime Policy, including public or private organisations, institutions, bodies 
and non-governmental organisations proportional  EU contribution to their budget would be 
more appropriate via operating grants.  
Public procurement contracts seem to be the appropriate instru ment for commissioning 
consultancy work and financi ng studies alongside informati on and communication campaigns 
which seek to promote the development an d implementation of the IMP, including 
conferences, seminars, workshops, stakeholde rs' platforms and fora as well as the 
development and maintenance of information te chnology infrastructure and websites. Certain 
marine knowledge activities , particularly where righ ts to use marine data will be obtained on 
behalf of industry, public auth orities and researchers, will continue to be implemented 
through public procurement. 
2.4.6.  Lessons from the past 
As outlined above, the Integrated Maritime Po licy came into being at the end of 2007. In 
order to develop proposals fo r EU action in this domain, a number of pilot projects and 
preparatory actions were init iated in the period 2008-2010.  
It is premature, at this stage, to judge  their outcome. Although the pilot projects and 
preparatory actions on the IMP have conti nuously been launched since 2008, due to the 
extensive preliminary discussions  with stakeholders as to how  the projects should best 
achieve their targets, many of them did not start till the be ginning of 2010. For instance, the 
greater part of the maritime surveillance projects did not commence until the beginning of 2010. The first batch of marine knowledge proj ects started in mid-2009 and will start to 
 
EN 27   EN deliver results that can be ev aluated in mid 2010. Again due to the extensive discussion with 
stakeholders, most of the spatial planning projec ts will not start till 2010. The European Atlas 
of the Seas, the database of EU-funded mar itime projects and the internet maritime forum, 
which contribute to the maritime governance a nd visibility of maritime Europe objectives, 
will come on-line in the beginning of 2010. 
In accordance with Article 27 (4) of the Fi nancial Regulation and Article 21 (3) of its 
Implementing rules, all major projects will be subject to retrospective ex-post evaluations (see 
in table below). Lessons from these projects and their evaluation can start once the results 
become available. 
In particular, an ex-post evaluation of the re sults of the maritime surveillance projects is 
scheduled for 2012 and the conclusions drawn ther eof will feed into th e upcoming Integrated 
Maritime Surveillance Impact Assessment planne d for 2014. Similarly, an ex-post evaluation 
of preparatory actions on the maritime spatia l planning will be launched shortly after their 
finalisation, i.e. in January 2012. The first batc h of marine knowledge pr ojects started in mid-
2009 and will start to deliver results that can be evaluated in mid 2010. An Impact 
Assessment on the European Marine Observat ion and Data Network, was submitted to the 
Impact Assessment Board in November 2009 and a final report is  under preparation.45 An 
interim evaluation will start at  the beginning of 2011 that will report in early 2012. An ex-post 
evaluation will be launch ed at the end of 2013.  
The table below describes the budget spen t in the period 2008-2010 on IMP projects and 
presents an indicative plan of interim and ex -post evaluations to be conducted on the main 
IMP projects: 
Type  Budget spent in 
the period 2008-2010  Start of major 
activity  Interim 
evaluation  Ex-post 
evaluation  
Maritime governance €550,000 2009   
Sea-basin strategies €490,000 2009   
Maritime Surveillance €7,200,000 2010  2012 
Marine knowledge €6,690,000 Mid 2009 2011 2013 
Maritime spatial planning €1,800,000 2010  2012 
International dimension of IMP €60,000 2008   
New economic opportunities €2,297,622 2010   
Visibility of Maritime Europe €1,600,000. 2009 2011* (part of 
marine knowledge 
evaluation) 2013 
Total  €20,687,622    
                                                 
45 Reference number 2009/MARE/003. 
 
EN 28   EN 2.4.7.  Volume of appropriations, human resources  and other administra tive expenditure  
In view of estimates made on the basis of current  and projected expenses associated with pilot 
projects and preparatory actions on the Integrat ed Maritime Policy, it is considered reasonable 
that the EU intervention for the period 2011-2013 as well as the administrative expenditure in 
terms of human resources needed for the management of the EU Programme should be allocated as follows: 
 Total contribution over 
the 2011-2013 period Administrative 
Expenditure - Human 
Resources 2011-2013
46 
1. Integrated Maritime Governance  €1,000,000 - €3,000,000 2.42 
2. Tools for Integrated Policy 
Making   
Integrated Maritime 
Surveillance €1,500,000 - €5,000,000 3.37 
Maritime Spatial Planning and 
Integrated Coastal Zone 
Management €4,000,000 - €7,000,000  5.98 
Marine Knowledge €20,000,000 - €24,000,000 4.56 
3. Activities in relation to the 
sea basins  €3,000,000 - €7,000,000 3.18 
4. International Dimension of 
the IMP €600,000 - €1,200,000  1.16 
5. Defining the boundaries of 
sustainability of maritime activities through the implementation of the MSFD €4,000,000 - €6,000,000 3.60 
6. Sustainable economic 
growth, employment and innovation €3,000,000 - € 7,000,000 1.93 
7. Raising the Visibility of 
Maritime Europe  €1,500,000 - €3,000,000 2.1 
Total amount €50,000,000 28.2 
                                                 
46 Full-time equivalents (person-years) over 3 years.  
 
EN 29   EN 2.5. Added value of EU involvement  
Any intervention at EU level shall be pursued w ith due respect to subsidiarity, proportionality 
and additionality.47 
2.5.1.  Additionality  
As a general rule, synergies, coherence and complementarity with different EU financial 
instruments in relation to closely relate d policy domains shall be always sought.48 In this 
context, the financial inte rvention on the basis of actions needed  to support the 
implementation of the Integrated Maritime Polic y should complement and be coherent with 
existing and future financial instruments at EU le vel, as well as at na tional and sub-national 
level in Member States, made available to im plement the necessary actions to promote the 
sustainable use of the oc eans, seas and coasts.  
Other EU financial instruments which have a be aring on the core objectives of the Integrated 
Maritime Policy, include the Cohesion Fund, th e European Regional Development Fund, the 
European Fisheries Fund, the Competitiven ess and Innovation Framework Programme and 
the Seventh Framework Programme for re search, technological development and 
demonstration activities, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) and the European 
Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument. Alone  these do not cover all the Integrated 
Maritime Policy overarching priorities and goals. This, implies, that there is therefore a 
rationale for providing financ ial support at the EU level to support actions which seek 
completely and exclusively to pu rsue further the objectives of th e Integrated Maritime Policy.  
Conversely any action financed with a view to pursuing the objectives the Integrated 
Maritime Policy, contribute significantly to the ac hievement of other EU sectoral policy goals 
with a bearing on maritime affairs.49  
2.5.2.  Subsidiarity  
As emphasised in the Blue Paper of October 2007 and its accompanying Action Plan, any EU 
action aimed at further developi ng and implementing the Integrat ed Maritime Policy must be 
pursued with due respect to the principle of subs idiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on 
European Union. In the field of Integrated Ma ritime Policy, the rationale for action at EU 
level stems from the cross-sectoral and trans-national nature of the activities involved and synergies among sectoral policies. The purpose is to develop a comprehensive strategy for 
growth and sustainability for the oceans, seas, co astal regions and maritime sectors. Particular 
cases in point are the activities relating to cross-cutting policy tool s and cross-sectoral 
maritime actions, and to the international di mension of the Integrated Maritime Policy 
because of their transboundary aspects. These tools and activities include the  common 
                                                
 
47 Commission Ex Ante Evaluation Practical Guide for Preparing Proposals for Expenditure Programmes 
(2001), Annex III: European Added Value (EAV) and other related terms, p. 29. 
48 Ibid, p. 18-19. 
49 For instance, the integration of maritime surveillance which is one of the objectives of the Integrated 
Maritime Policy is in total consistency with the ongoing process to build the European Border 
Surveillance System (Eurosur). In particular, the aspects of the Eurosur Communication dealing with 
surveillance of external maritime borders form part of the overall framework set by the Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union. Moreover, the initiative is coherent with the EU maritime 
acquis  and in particular Directive 2002/59/EC, as am ended, which is the legal basis for the most 
important existing surveillance systems at  EU level (AIS, LR IT, SafeSeaNet).  
 
EN 30   EN information sharing environment for the EU  maritime domain, maritime spatial planning, 
integrated coastal zone management a nd the marine data and knowledge network50 . 
Action at Union level aimed at  implementing the Integrated Maritime Policy would not 
negatively affect similar measures  taken in Member States or regions. Rather, cross-sectoral 
actions taken at various level of government  would mutually complement and enhance one 
another. The full potential for optimised maritime policy-making will not be reaped unless the integrated approach permeates every level of government.
51 Thus, action at Union level in the 
field of Maritime Policy is likely to produce clear benefits by reason of its scale and effects, 
compared with activities and actions pursued only  at the level of Memb er States and regions. 
In its conclusions of 16 November 2009 on the IMP Progress report of 15 October, the 
Council invited the Member States and the Commi ssion to continue thei r activities with due 
respect to subsidiarity and proportionality and welcomed the work of the Commission and 
Member States as well as future orientations on IMP. 
Ensuring proper implementation of integrated governance of maritime and coastal affairs, 
promoting integrated sea basin strategies for the sustainable development of maritime sectors 
and coastal regions and ensuring effective po licy coordination of se ctor-specific policy 
initiatives of sea-related matters across Member  States and regions necessitate the need for 
action at EU level. Particularly, an EU intervention which promotes and fosters the 
overcoming of the fragmented nature of EU polic ies and actions that relate to the sea, the 
identification and exploitation of synergies, the exchange of best practices, collective 
learning, and the broad involvement of stakeholde rs in decision-making in relation to oceans, 
sea and coasts, will have a positive impact on th e main objectives of the Integrated Maritime 
Policy - integration of governance structures  by making them more inclusive and co-
operative, building of marine knowledge base and cross-cutting tools necessary to enable the 
implementation of integrated pol icies; improvement of the qua lity of sectoral policies, 
through increased coherence across sectors; implementing all above, taking into account 
specificities of the regional seas around Europe, through ta ilor-made solutions, in full 
complementarity with existing regional conventions and agreements, and applicable EU Neighbourhood and Enlargement policies;
52 
                                                 
50 For instance, in the filed of integrated maritime  surveillance, the vast ma jority of monitoring and 
surveillance activities at sea falls within the competence of national authorities established in accordance with national and EU legislation (the EU maritime acquis  and in particular Directive 
2002/59/EC). Following the principle of subsidiarity, Member States are responsible for coordinating 
the collection and verification of information from all their agencies, administrations and national operators, preferably via a single national coordination mechanism. In such a context, the EU 
involvement is validated on the presumption that it aims at maximising the sy stems' cross-border and 
cross-sectoral usefulness, which would otherwise be blocked by cultural, administrative as well as legal obstacles from EU and national legislation (e.g. on personal data and confidentiality) and improving  
Member states authorities' operational efficiency, thro ugh improved maritime situational awareness, to 
the benefit of human lives at sea, the marine environment and internal security .  
51 Commission Communication "Guidelines for an Integrated Approach to Maritime Policy: Towards best 
practice in integrated maritime governance and stakeholder consultation"- COM(2008) 395 of 29.6.2008, p.4.  
52 Commission Progress Report on the EU's Integrated Maritime Policy – COM(2009) 540 final of 
15.10.2009, p. 2-3. 
 
EN 31   EN 2.5.3.  Proportionality  
According to Article 5 of the Treaty on Europ ean Union and the principle of proportionality, 
EU action should not go beyond what is necessar y in order to achieve satisfactorily the 
objectives which have been set. The proposal re spects the principle of proportionality because 
in the field of Integrated Maritime Policy,  Union's actions do not  go beyond what it is 
necessary to achieve satisfactorily the pursued IMP objectives. They leave as much scope for 
national decision as possible, and respect well established na tional arrangements and legal 
systems. 
Action at Union level on the Integrated Maritim e Policy would add value to the measures that 
the Member States are already taking, and woul d provide resources additional to those the 
Member States are already spending. These resources are proportionate since they would 
enable the Member States, regions or regional stakeholders to achieve the objectives of the 
Integrated Maritime Policy more effectively.53 
2.6. Conclusion  
In view of the above and to ensure a mo dest financial underpinning for the further 
development and implementation of the Integr ated Maritime Policy for the period 2011-2013, 
it is considered important for the EU to contribute to its funding. 
2.7. Follow-Up: Planning future monitoring and evaluation  
The technical and financial implementation of actions financed by the Programme shall be 
monitored by the Commission, on the basis of reports on the progress of work submitted to the Commission by the beneficiary and also th rough on-the-spot monitoring checks. A final 
report shall also be submitted within three mont hs of the completion of each project. Projects 
and other actions financed by the Programme will also be subject to audits, including audits 
outsourced to contractors. An article to this effect is included in the proposal.  
Indicators ensuring a good quality monitoring sy stem are being developed actions covering 
resources, output and impact. These are designed to be measurable using available indicators 
that do not require expensive stud ies. Indicators to be used fo r the actions on the promotion of 
integrated sea basin strategies around Europe and integrated approach at all levels of maritime 
governance will be the number of initiatives and integrated strategies taken by Member States 
and coastal regions towards the integration of maritime policy for the sustainable development of maritime sectors and coastal regi ons within their administrative structure as 
well as the number of cross-sectoral coope ration and exchange structures, groups and 
networks on maritime affairs at a regional, national and sea-basin level. 
Member States approval of the roadmap for the establishment of the common information  
sharing environment will be an indicator of whet her the actions on maritime surveillance to be 
financed through this program are appropriate, conclusive and necessary. Indicators to be 
                                                
 
53 For instance, in the case of the integrated maritime surveillance,  EU intervention will be limited to 
making the different information layers of existing systems interoperable and able to be used to cover 
pre-identified needs of all user communities at  EU level, showing maximum respect to the 
proportionality principle.  The building up of the common information sharing environment should not 
in any way hinder the development of existing and planned sectoral information systems, including 
their evolution, as long as the need for interope rability enabling an information exchange with other 
relevant systems is taken into account. 
 
EN 32   EN used for the actions on maritime spatial planning  (MSP) will be the number of Member States 
applying MSP in their nationa l waters (territorial sea an d EEZ) and the number of cross-
border initiatives for MSP, using the key principles  identified at EU level. Progress in 
integrated coastal zone management is measur ed as regards outputs in  number of practical 
applications of ICZM at diffe rent scales of governance. As  regards results and outcomes, 
specific progress and sustainability indicator s were developed further to the European 
Parliament and Council Reco mmendation on ICZM of 2002. This Recommendation also 
provides the framework for regular evaluation,  based on Member State reporting and EU 
assessments of the state of the coas t by the European E nvironment Agency. 
Resource, output and impact indicators for maritime knowledge have been set out in the 
impact assessment54. These are designed to be easy to measure. For instance hits on web-sites 
will be used as proxies to judge take-up of in formation from marine knowledge initiatives as 
well as those of the European A tlas of the Seas and stakeholder forums. Indicators to be used 
for the actions on the promotion of the inte rnational dimension of the IMP will be the 
outcome of workshops, seminars and events (p articipation, Conference Declarations, agreed 
minutes) to be held in the c ontext of international fora.  
Indicators to be used for actions on defini ng the boundaries of sustainability of human 
activities are the content and extent of excha nges which have taken place between regions and 
the establishment of me thodological standards as  a result of this. Fu rther, study results on 
litter and the realization of  a proposal for a pilot project on adaptive management. 
Sustainable economic growth, em ployment and innovation will be  measured by study results 
and feedback from stakeholders. These wi ll be supplemented by GDP and unemployment 
indicators in coastal regions and maritime sectors obtained from Eurostat and attainment of Good Environmental Status as defined by th e Marine Strategy Framework Directive will 
measure sustainability. Results will feed into  political programming in DG MARE and in 
other Commission services. As far as the maritime contribution to the EU2020 strategy
55 is 
concerned, the measuring and ev aluation criteria for this strategy will be employed mutatis 
mutandis. 
The proposed EU programme is intended to star t in 2011 and run until th e end of the current 
Financial Perspective 2007-2013. The Programme, as  a whole, will be subject to an ex-post 
evaluation to be submitted to the European Pa rliament and the Council, no later than 31 
December 2014. An article to this effect is in cluded in the proposal. Additionally, as outlined 
in section 2.4.6, in accordance w ith Article 27 (4) of the Financial Regulation and Article 21 
(3) of its Implementing rules, al l major IMP projects will be subj ect to specific retrospective 
ex-post evaluations to be conducted before 2013. 
As provided for in the implementation rules app licable to the general budget of the Union, the 
evaluation of the Programme will focus on the review of the financial and human resources allocated and the results obtained in  order to verify that they are consistent with the objectives 
to be pursued. The evaluation shall be proportion ate to the resources mobilised for, and the 
impact of, the programme. 
                                                
 
54 Impact Assessment Board Reference Number 2009/MARE/003. 
55 COM(2009) 647 final of 24.11.2009.