Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

*|*

# 52012SC0255

**REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Progress of the EU's Integrated Maritime Policy /\* SWD/2012/0255 final \*/**

  

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Accompanying the document

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Progress of the EU’s Integrated
Maritime Policy

Two years after the creation of the
Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP)[1],
the Council and European Parliament welcomed a first Progress Report[2] and asked the Commission to
present further developments before the end of 2012[3]. This document presents in
detail the actions and activities pursued to implement the IMP and individual EU
policies related to the seas, oceans and coasts since 2009. They are set out
under the general headings of the second Progress Report on the IMP[4].

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1........... The contribution of maritime
industries to European growth and employment.................... 5

1.1........ Blue Growth................................................................................................................... 5

1.2........ Maritime transport.......................................................................................................... 6

1.2.1..... White Paper for Transport.............................................................................................. 6

1.2.2..... Motorways of the Sea and Marco
Polo Programme........................................................ 6

1.2.3..... Blue Belt........................................................................................................................ 7

1.2.4..... Promotion of short-sea shipping
(SSS)............................................................................ 7

1.2.5..... European Maritime Transport Space
without barriers and the eMaritime initiative............. 8

1.2.6..... Ports Policy.................................................................................................................... 8

1.3........ Energy............................................................................................................................ 9

1.3.1..... Gas and electricity
interconnections: European Energy Programme for Recovery (EEPR). 9

1.3.2..... Offshore wind energy...................................................................................................... 9

1.3.3..... Ocean energy................................................................................................................. 9

1.3.4..... Trans-European Energy Networks
(TEN-E)................................................................. 10

1.3.5..... Maritime projects within the
Intelligent Energy Europe programme (IEE)........................ 11

1.4........ Shipbuilding.................................................................................................................. 12

1.4.1..... Revision of the LeaderSHIP
strategy............................................................................. 12

1.4.2..... Framework on State Aid to Shipbuilding....................................................................... 13

1.5........ Fisheries and aquaculture.............................................................................................. 13

1.5.1..... Common Fisheries Policy.............................................................................................. 13

1.5.2..... Aquaculture.................................................................................................................. 15

2........... Cooperation across sectors and
borders to ensure optimum growth conditions for the maritime economy         16

2.1........ Maximising the sustainable
pursuit of activities on coasts and at sea................................ 16

2.1.1..... Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP).................................................................................. 16

2.1.2..... Integrated Coastal Zone Management
(ICZM).............................................................. 17

2.1.3..... Public consultation on MSP and
ICZM......................................................................... 19

2.2........ Protecting European citizens and
maritime industries against sea-related threats.............. 20

2.2.1..... Integrated maritime surveillance..................................................................................... 20

2.2.2..... MARSUNO and BluemassMed................................................................................... 21

2.2.3..... Joint Research Centre — maritime
surveillance research................................................ 22

2.2.4..... EU maritime safety........................................................................................................ 22

2.2.5..... Enhancing maritime transport
security............................................................................ 25

2.2.6..... Securing Europe’s maritime borders.............................................................................. 26

2.3........ Maritime employment and career
mobility...................................................................... 26

3........... Research, knowledge and
end-users: bridging the gap between research and industry..... 26

3.1........ Ensuring European maritime
leadership through innovation and research......................... 26

3.2........ Sharing marine knowledge to
facilitate innovation, investment and sound policy-making.. 27

4........... The territorial benefits of
maritime policy........................................................................ 29

4.1........ Regional policy............................................................................................................. 29

4.1.1..... Cross-border maritime cooperation............................................................................... 30

4.1.2..... Proposal for EU structural policy
2014-2020................................................................ 32

4.2........ Sea basin strategies....................................................................................................... 32

4.2.1..... A maritime strategy for the
Atlantic area........................................................................ 32

4.2.2..... EU strategy for the Baltic Sea
Region............................................................................ 33

4.2.3..... The Mediterranean dimension of IMP........................................................................... 34

4.2.4..... Adriatic-Ionian Sea basins............................................................................................ 35

4.2.5..... Black Sea..................................................................................................................... 36

4.2.6..... EU policy towards the Arctic........................................................................................ 36

5........... Protecting marine ecosystems — a
condition and factor for growth................................ 37

5.1........ The challenge of healthy marine
ecosystems: implementing the Marine Strategy Framework Directive   37

5.1.1..... Progress in MSFD implementation................................................................................ 37

5.1.2..... Pilot projects on marine litter......................................................................................... 38

5.1.3..... Scientific and technical support
for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD).. 39

5.2........ Port reception facilities.................................................................................................. 39

5.3........ Marine Natura 2000 and habitat
mapping...................................................................... 39

5.4........ Maritime safety............................................................................................................. 40

5.5........ Atmospheric pollution from
maritime shipping................................................................ 40

5.6........ Climate change............................................................................................................. 42

5.6.1..... European Climate Adaptation
Platform.......................................................................... 42

5.6.2..... Adaptation to the effects of
climate change.................................................................... 43

5.6.3..... Climate change mitigation.............................................................................................. 43

5.6.4..... Geological storage of CO2........................................................................................... 44

6........... Better management of maritime
affairs........................................................................... 45

6.1........ Developments in Member States................................................................................... 45

6.2........ Developments at EU level............................................................................................. 46

6.2.1..... Joint Programming Initiative
Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans........................... 46

6.2.2..... European Parliament..................................................................................................... 47

6.2.3..... Council......................................................................................................................... 47

6.2.4..... Committee of the Regions............................................................................................. 48

6.2.5..... The European Economic and Social
Committee............................................................. 48

6.2.6..... Financing of the IMP.................................................................................................... 49

6.2.7..... Coordination between the
Commission and the Member States..................................... 50

6.3........ Developments at international
level — strengthening global ocean governance................ 50

6.4........ Improving socio-economic data for
maritime sectors and maritime regions...................... 51

6.5........ Awareness and visibility of
maritime Europe.................................................................. 53

1.           The
contribution of maritime industries to European growth and employment

1.1.        Blue
Growth

In 2010, the Commission launched a study on
future sources of growth in the context of the Europe 2020 strategy — Blue
Growth: Scenarios and drivers for sustainable growth from the oceans, seas and
coasts. Supported by the Council[5],
this 20-month study was budgeted in 2010 and ran through 2011 and 2012. It underpinned
and accompanied the process leading to the adoption of the Blue Growth
Communication in September 2012.

The study provided an overview of Europe’s ‘blue
economy’, comprising economic activities related to the oceans, seas and
coasts. This includes the direct and indirect supporting activities necessary
for the functioning of these economic sectors, which can be located anywhere,
including in landlocked countries. The environmental challenges associated with
the development of these activities were also identified and discussed. Following
a ranking exercise based on key economic activities — those which have seen the
strongest growth in the last five years (for which data were available) and
those showing most growth potential for the coming years — eleven marine and
maritime activities were analysed further. These included mature sectors such
as coastal tourism, emerging sectors such as offshore wind, and developing
sectors such as blue biotechnology. For each of these activities, foresight scenarios
were developed through interviews and hearings with experts. This determined
the most likely growth scenarios for the next 5 to 15 years in each case.

In keeping with the Integrated Maritime
Policy approach, Europe’s different sea basins and the clusters around them
were also analysed. Synergies and tensions between the different marine and
maritime activities also provided further insight into how potential growth in
the blue economy can be unlocked. With the aim of establishing the conditions
for sustainable growth in marine and maritime activities, the study made policy
recommendations on: support for maritime research and development; access to
finance for emerging maritime activities; the crucial importance of smart
infrastructure and building critical mass through cluster support; the need to
anticipate skills needs; the need for public engagement and integrated local
development; and the importance of the development of maritime spatial
planning.

The Communication on Blue Growth:
opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth built on the
findings of the Blue Growth study. In terms of policy context, blue growth
represents the maritime dimension of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart,
sustainable growth – in line with the Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe.
Innovation is key to fostering economic growth and employment while ensuring
the sustainability of the marine and coastal environment. There are already
several initiatives in place or being developed by the EU and Member States in
support of the blue economy. However, on the basis of the findings of the Blue
Growth study, five areas are identified as suitable for further policy
development on account of their growth potential: blue energy; coastal,
maritime and cruise tourism; aquaculture; marine mineral resources; and blue
biotechnology. For each area, policy developments are envisaged to support the
expected sustainable growth in the next decade. All relevant actors, starting with
the EU institutions, Member States and regions, have an important role to play
in unlocking the potential for sustainable growth from our oceans, seas and
coasts.

1.2.        Maritime
transport

1.2.1.     White
Paper for Transport

The new White Paper for Transport was
adopted in March 2011[6].
It provides a policy response to address some of the challenges confronting the
transport sector, such as dependency on oil, climate and environment
challenges, congestion, and scarcity of funding. For the maritime sector, the
White Paper reflects the orientations of the ‘Maritime Transport Strategy until
2018’[7]:

·
The ability of the maritime transport sector to
provide cost-efficient maritime transport services adapted to the need for
sustainable economic growth in the EU and world economies;

·
The long-term competitiveness of the EU shipping
sector, enhancing its capacity to generate value and employment in the EU, both
directly and indirectly, across all maritime industries.

·
The White paper also looks beyond the sectoral
aspects and calls for seamless transport chains for passengers and cargo across
modes, in particular by better integrating waterborne transport.

1.2.2.     Motorways
of the Sea and Marco Polo Programme

The Motorways of the Sea have been
developed with the support of EU and national funding or directly by companies
since 2001. In 2011, in the new guidelines for the development of the
trans-European network, the Commission proposed a broader definition of
Motorways of the Sea[8].
They should be the maritime component of the trans-European transport network,
i.e. the main European corridors used for the movement of goods within the
European Union. In order to meet our future needs for mobility, energy and
economic efficiency, Motorways of the Sea should provide high-quality services.

Since 2010, the European Commission has been
promoting studies, pilot projects and work through the TEN-T multiannual call
for Motorways of the Sea to develop innovative solutions to reduce the
environmental impact of transport and increase transport efficiency. This
integrated approach has significantly contributed to the development of
administrative ‘single windows’ in the Member States and better hinterland
connections linking maritime and other transport modes. These actions provide
wider benefits, as they develop European know-how that will spread throughout
the maritime transport sector. Motorways of the Sea represent the spearhead in innovation
for maritime transport and logistics.

The Marco Polo Programme was originally
established in 2003 in order to reduce road congestion and to improve the
environmental performance of freight transport within the EU. Dedicated funding
for the service part of Motorways of the Sea actions was introduced in the
second edition of the programme, in 2007. The current Marco Polo Programme runs
until 2013 with an annual grant budget of about EUR 60 million. Marco Polo
publishes a call for proposals from potential grant applicants at the beginning
of each year on its website. JRC has developed the external cost calculator
used to evaluate proposals received under the Programme. The calculator is an
integrated tool for estimating the external costs of using different transport
modes and technologies for a specific freight flow.

In 2010, in the interest of clarity, the
European Parliament and the Council adopted a recast of the TEN-T Guidelines[9]. Transport infrastructure as
such is now well developed within the European Union. However, it is still
fragmented, both geographically and between and within transport modes. The
main objective of the new guidelines proposed in 2011 was to establish a
complete and integrated trans-European transport network, covering all Member
States and regions and providing the basis for the balanced development of all
transport modes in order to facilitate their respective advantages and maximise
the added value of the network for Europe.

1.2.3.     Blue
Belt

According to the 2011 White Paper on
Transport, a ‘Blue Belt’ in the seas around Europe would simplify the
formalities for ships travelling between EU ports through the use of new
technical facilities. It would further integrate intra-EU maritime transport within
the overall transport network by ensuring rapid port transit of goods from elsewhere
in the EU and seamless monitoring of vessels and transported goods in
international waters. Against this background, the Council supported the launching
of a pilot project by the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), built on the
existing SafeSeaNet technology, to validate and further refine the Blue Belt
concept and to closely examine all relevant aspects of customs and port
procedures and controls.

The project aimed to demonstrate to
national authorities, starting with customs authorities, what services
SafeSeaNet could offer to support their tasks, with a view to reducing
administrative burdens for maritime transport. The pilot project was launched
in May 2011 and ended in November 2011. An evaluation has since been carried
out. All ports in the Member States and 253 vessels participated in the
project. Information on the actual routes of participating ships and the last
ports visited were transmitted to the national customs authorities prior to the
arrival of ships in their ports. National customs authorities participating in
Blue Belt acknowledged that the pilot project had successfully delivered timely,
accurate and complete information related to the vessels and their voyages.
However, it did not provide information on the customs status of the goods
aboard, whereas their customs treatment depends on whether they are considered
as EU goods or non-EU goods. The Commission is analysing solutions (possible
legal amendments) to resolve the issue.

Though the operational phase of the pilot
project formally finished on 2 November 2011, the Commission requested EMSA to
continue the service offered to the national customs authorities after this
date.

1.2.4.     Promotion
of short-sea shipping (SSS)

Short-sea shipping (SSS) is a vital
component of the EU transport system, carrying around 40 % of goods
exchanged within the Single Market. It has a vastly underused potential, not
simply as an alternative to road transport, but also in the overall context of
co-modal logistics chains. In 2004, the Commission adopted an action plan to promote
short-sea shipping, by simplifying administrative formalities and better using
funding programmes and instruments such as TEN-T for infrastructure and the Marco
Polo Programme for services.

The action plan was reviewed in 2006 and supplemented
by other initiatives, notably the 2009 Communication and Action Plan on the
establishment of a European maritime transport space without barriers[10], which addressed the
administrative barriers hampering SSS, and the 2011 ‘Sustainable Waterborne
Transport Toolbox’, to support the sustainability dimension of the SSS actions.

The action plan is monitored in cooperation
with the group of national focal points established by the European Commission,
which meets twice a year, and with the Short Sea Promotion Centres in the Member
States. On 1 June 2011, a maritime stakeholder event ‘Clean air at sea,
exploring solutions for sustainable and competitive shipping’ was held in
Brussels. The outcome of this event provided valuable input in particular for
the Sustainable Waterborne Transport Toolbox.

1.2.5.     European Maritime Transport Space without barriers and the
eMaritime initiative

In 2009 the European Commission adopted a
Communication and an action plan to establish a European maritime transport
space without barriers, aiming to harmonise and simplify administrative
procedures for intra-EU maritime transport. The action plan contains short- and
medium-term measures and recommendations to the Member States.

In accordance with the action plan, the
European Parliament and the Council adopted Directive 2010/65/EU on reporting
formalities on 20 October 2010. The general objective of the directive is to
simplify and harmonise the administrative procedures for maritime transport by
making the electronic transmission of information standard practice and by
rationalising reporting formalities.

In order to assist in implementing the reporting
formalities directive, the Commission has established an expert group on maritime
administrative simplification and electronic information services (known as the
eMS group) with the task of developing specifications and services for
electronic data exchange and ‘single windows’ for EU maritime transport. EMSA
will support the Commission and the Member States in developing the functional
and technical specifications.

In addition, in March 2010 the Commission
adopted an amendment to the implementing provisions of the Community Customs
Code to streamline the granting and management of authorisations for regular
shipping services plying solely between EU ports.

1.2.6.     Ports
Policy

The European Commission’s Ports Policy is
currently based on the Communication on a European Ports Policy[11]. At the end of 2011, the
European Commission also announced a full review of the Ports Policy to take
into account the changing situation and challenges from a social, economic and
environmental perspective. This review is focusing on three aspects: the full
integration of ports in the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T);
further administrative facilitation (Maritime Space without Borders); and
possible initiatives on transparency and regulated market access (to make sure
that public funding is used in the most effective way). This will ensure that
the port industry is fully integrated within the Europe 2020 Strategy and can
contribute to the further development of the European economy. The review is
taking place in full consultation with the port sector, Member States and the
European Parliament. The results are expected in the course of 2013.

In 2011, the Commission received a common
request from four EU organisations representing the employers and the workers
of ports in view of creating a new EU social dialogue committee in the sector.

JRC is
contributing to the preparatory work for the policy initiative. It is quantifying
potential impacts using models, in this case TRANSTOOLS combined with ad-hoc
models focusing on port competition. The objective is to estimate how the
proposed new measures will attract new investment in ports, allowing them to
improve their services and efficiency. As a result, competition between ports
and across transport modes is expected to change in the direction anticipated
in the recent White Paper on Transport (lower CO2 emissions from
transport in general, modal shift to non-road modes, lower transport costs in
general). The models can capture and measure the extent of the changes in the
transport system, provided the initial input, often empirical, is adequate.

1.3.        Energy

1.3.1.     Gas
and electricity interconnections: European Energy Programme for Recovery (EEPR)

The EEPR Regulation[12] has its origins in the EUR 200
billion European Economic Recovery Plan, presented by the Commission in
November 2008, as a response to the economic and financial crisis in Europe. It
entered into force on 1 August 2009 with the aim of reinforcing the EU’s energy
supply with a budget of almost EUR 4 billion. Part of this budget (2.3
billion Euro) is used by the Commission to finance 43 energy projects in the
fields of gas and electricity interconnections, including high-voltage lines,
high-pressure gas pipelines, underground storage facilities, liquefied natural
gas (LNG) terminals, and supporting equipment.

1.3.2.     Offshore
wind energy

Through EEPR, DG ENER grants EUR 565
million to industrial-scale innovative projects for offshore wind turbines and
foundation structures as well as to first-of-a-kind projects deploying HVDC (high-voltage
direct-current) technology for the grid integration of offshore wind farms.
EEPR serves the twin objectives of contributing to the integrated EU climate
and energy objectives (20-20-20 goals) and contributing to growth and jobs in
the EU. As such, it contributes to economic recovery in the EU’s coastal
regions.

Wind energy technology has also been
supported through successive FP programmes as part of the policy of transition
towards a more sustainable energy system in Europe. Research and development
projects related to offshore wind turbine and wind farm design have been
supported starting in FP4. Since FP6, technology demonstration also includes
offshore wind projects. Through the FP7, the Commission supports technology
research and demonstration projects regarding very large offshore wind energy
systems, reliability and maintenance (2008 and 2012 calls), offshore wind grid
integration (2008 and 2009 calls), floating platforms for offshore turbines (2010
and 2011 calls).

Offshore wind energy technology has been
singled out as a priority in the frame of the EU's Strategic Energy Technology
Plan. This plan led to the development of a Roadmap for wind energy technology
and to the establishment of the European Wind Industrial Initiative in which
industry, member states and the EC work on a long-term approach to support technology
demonstration projects. The recent FP calls are based on recommendations of the
European Wind Initiative.

1.3.3.     Ocean
energy

R&D Ocean energy projects have been
supported since the eighties. At DG RTD, the earlier projects were mainly
focussed at device development while since FP7, a more global approach has been
taken to optimise components (CORES) and methodologies (EQUIMAR) for various systems
(wave and tidal). DG Energy has been supporting ocean energy projects with a
predominant demonstration component since 2006. In earlier years, six such
projects had been supported, with a total amount of €9.9 million. In 2009 four
new grant agreements[13]
have been signed for a total support figure of €20.7 million. These projects
were addressing the development, demonstration and monitoring of the operation
of single devises.

The 2011 call for proposals was addressing
the deployment of the first grid connected ocean energy farms, using the same
device type, in real sea environments, with an installed capacity of 3MW or
over.

For 2013, the FP7 call will address the
design of ocean energy device arrays while coordination of Members States will
be supported through an ERA-NET.

1.3.4.     Trans-European
Energy Networks (TEN-E)

In October 2011, the European Commission
tabled a comprehensive package to enhance trans-European infrastructure
development in the areas of transport, energy and the information society. This
package includes five legislative proposals: the three sectoral guidelines setting
out sectoral infrastructure policies; the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF); and
the project bond pilot proposal as a forerunner for other financial
instruments.

Communication COM/2011/0658 final sets out
rules for the timely development and interoperability of trans-European energy
networks[14].
To this end, it identifies, for the period up to 2020 and beyond, a limited
number of trans-European priority corridors across electricity and gas networks
and thematic areas where EU action is most warranted.

·
Priority Electricity Corridors:

·
North Sea Offshore Grid

·
North-South electricity interconnections in
Western Europe

·
North-South electricity interconnections in
Central Eastern and South Eastern Europe

·
Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan for electricity

·
Priority Gas Corridors:

·
North-South gas interconnections in Western
Europe

·
North-South gas interconnections in Central
Eastern and South Eastern Europe

·
Southern Gas Corridor

·
Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan for gas

·
Oil supply connections in Central Eastern Europe

·
Priority Thematic Areas:

·
Smart-grid deployment

·
Electricity highways

·
Cross-border carbon dioxide network

The interconnection, interoperability and
development of trans-European networks for transporting electricity and gas are
essential for the effective operation of the internal energy market in
particular and the Single Market in general. TEN-E plays a crucial role in
ensuring the security and diversification of supply[15]. Interoperability with the
energy networks of third countries (accession and candidate countries and other
countries in Europe as well as countries in the Mediterranean, Black Sea and
Caspian Sea basins and in the Middle East and Gulf regions) is essential. The
budget allocated to TEN-E (around EUR 20 million per year) is mainly
intended for financing feasibility studies. Other EU instruments may also step
in to part-finance investments, for example the Structural Funds in the
convergence regions.

1.3.5.     Maritime
projects within the Intelligent Energy Europe programme (IEE)

·
OffshoreGrid[16]
(2009-2011) was a strategic project to develop a design for the offshore grid
in Northern Europe, along with a suitable regulatory framework taking into
account technical, economic, policy and regulatory aspects. OffshoreGrid
targeted European policy makers, industry, transmission system operators and
regulators. Its geographical scope initially comprised the regions around the
Baltic and North Seas, the English Channel and the Irish Sea. Later, the
results were applied to the Mediterranean region, in qualitative terms.
OffshoreGrid provided inputs for the preparation of the Commission’s Communication
on Energy infrastructure priorities for 2020 and beyond[17].
OffshoreGrid is referred to both in the Communication itself and in the Impact
Assessment, and its achievements have been commended by high-level
representatives of DG ENER and by the Commissioner for Energy, as well as by
ENTSO-E, national TSOs and companies working in the sector.

·
The WINDSPEED[18]
project (2008-2011) set out a roadmap for the deployment of offshore wind power
in the central and southern North Sea basin. The roadmap included (a) the
definition of an ambitious but realistic medium-term offshore wind energy
target, (b) identification of risks and barriers, along with a set of
coordinated policy recommendations for the deployment of offshore wind in the
above-mentioned sea basin.

·
The SEANERGY 2020[19] project (2010-2012) aims to
formulate concrete policy recommendations on how best to deal with maritime
spatial planning (MSP) and remove MSP obstacles to the deployment of offshore
power generation. The project focuses particularly on offshore renewable energy
technologies and related grid infrastructure. It will provide policy
recommendations for a more coordinated approach to MSP and for greater
deployment of offshore renewables (wind, wave, tidal). These recommendations
will be put to different national, regional and European authorities, and will
also be disseminated to the different maritime users through specific bilateral
meetings and workshops organised in four different sea basins (Atlantic,
Mediterranean, Baltic and North Sea).

·
GP WIND[20]
(2010-2012) aims to address barriers to the development of onshore and offshore
wind by developing good practice in reconciling objectives for renewable energy
with environmental objectives and actively involving local and regional
communities. The key European added value is demonstrating and disseminating
good practice from individual countries to target audiences across Europe, thus
providing tools that can be used by industry, developers, European, national
and local policy makers, regulatory authorities, environmental agencies and
groups and local communities to improve policy, guidance and practice in dealing
with applications for new renewable energy projects. The project aims to
deliver at least five official commitments from Member State stakeholders confirming
that they have adopted the best practices identified. It also aims to reduce by
at least 20 % the average time taken to process planning applications.

·
SOWFIA[21]
(2010 – 2013) aims to facilitate the development of European-wide coordinated,
unified and streamlined environmental and socio-economic Impact Assessment (IA)
tools for offshore wave energy conversion developments. By utilising the
findings from technology-specific monitoring at multiple sites, SOWFIA will
accelerate knowledge transfer and jump-start European-wide expertise on
environmental and socio-economic IA of large-scale wave energy projects. Regional
coordination via SOWFIA project collaboration will enable the exchange, sharing
and transfer of IA and policy experience and associated knowledge and good
practices.

1.4.        Shipbuilding

1.4.1.     Revision
of the LeaderSHIP strategy

Notwithstanding the current crisis in large
parts of the global shipbuilding and shipping sector, Europe’s maritime
industry with its strong innovation and design capacity has a strategic role to
play in addressing major challenges such as climate change and energy
efficiency.

The LeaderSHIP
2015[22]
strategy was prepared by the shipbuilding industry in 2002 and endorsed by the
Commission in 2003[23].
It was launched as a strategic response to tackle fundamental challenges in the
sector, and represents an ambitious programme to ensure the long-term future
of the sector in the world market. Its main objectives are to gain competitive
edge by building on the EU’s already existing technological leadership in
selected market segments in order to protect innovation and know-how,
strengthen customer focus, and improve the industry structure. To this
end, measures have been taken in eight action areas: level playing field;
improving research, development and innovation (RDI); access to finance; safer
and more environmentally friendly ships; naval shipbuilding; intellectual
property rights (IPR); access to a skilled workforce; building a sustainable
industry structure.

In 2007, in its review of the
implementation of the strategy[24],
the Commission reported on positive developments in the sector and major
achievements of the strategy. Favoured by a positive market evolution, the
European shipbuilding industry had made substantial progress in innovation and
specialisation.

The current review and update of the
LeaderSHIP initiative builds on the achievements of the existing approach and
adapts to the demanding business environment caused by the profound crisis in
global shipbuilding. It will address opportunities for diversification and
challenges in the move to new business areas. Moreover, it aims to give a
strong fresh impetus to future directions in innovation, greening, application
of new technologies, and new emerging markets like off-shore wind energy. To
reach this objective, cooperation between industry, the social partners, and
public authorities at regional, Member State and European level needs to be
strengthened. The renewed strategy will develop a vision for a sustainable
foundation for the European shipbuilding industry, so as to contribute to
sustainable, secure and safe waterborne transport and to further advances in
the use of marine resources and energy generation.

1.4.2.     Framework
on State Aid to Shipbuilding

The Framework on State Aid to
Shipbuilding determines which types of state aid are allowed for the shipyards.
The previous Framework was due to expire on 31 December 2011. Therefore, in
view of adopting a new Framework, the Commission carried out a public
consultation[25]
followed by an impact assessment[26].
The new Framework was adopted in December 2011[27]
and will be valid until the end of 2013. It contains specific provisions in
relation to innovation aid and regional aid for shipbuilding, as well as
provisions on exports credits.

The new set of rules has an extended scope
as it now concerns inland waterway vessels and, as regards innovation aid,
floating and moving offshore structures. Other novelties relate to innovation
aid as the Framework now provides for precise rules ensuring that public
support has a real incentive effect. It also increases the admissible intensity
of the aid where innovation has a positive environmental impact.

As was the case before the revision, the
shipbuilding industry is eligible under the horizontal State aid instruments,
unless otherwise provided for in those instruments.

1.5.        Fisheries
and aquaculture

1.5.1.     Common
Fisheries Policy

The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is not
achieving its key objectives: fish stocks are overfished, the economic situation
of parts of the fleet is fragile despite high subsidies, jobs in the fishing
sector are unattractive, and the situation of many coastal communities dependent
on fisheries is precarious. Against this background, the Commission proposed an
ambitious reform of the policy in July 2011[28].
This reform is about putting in place the conditions for a better future for
fish and fisheries alike, as well as the marine environment that supports them.
The CFP has enormous potential to deliver the building blocks for sustainable
fisheries that respect the ecosystem as well as ensuring high-quality, healthy
fish products for European citizens, thriving coastal communities, profitable
industries producing and processing fish, and more attractive and safer jobs.

The reform will contribute to the Europe
2020 Strategy[29]
by working towards sustainable and inclusive growth, enhanced cohesion in
coastal regions, and robust economic performance of the industry. By aiming to
ensure that living marine resources are exploited sustainably, the reform is
also a key component of the ‘resource-efficient Europe’ flagship[30] initiative.

Sustainability is at the heart of the
proposed reform. Fishing sustainably means fishing at levels that do not
endanger the reproduction of stocks and that provide high long-term yields. The
Commission proposes that by 2015, stocks must be exploited at sustainable
levels that produce the ‘maximum sustainable yield’. The Commission also
proposes eliminating the practice of throwing unwanted fish overboard by 2016.
Such discards are an unacceptable waste of resources. If stocks were exploited
at maximum sustainable yield, this would increase stock sizes significantly along
with overall catches, profit margins and return on investments. Gross value added
for the catching industry would almost double.

Fishing sustainably will free the catching
sector from depending on public support. It would also make it easier to achieve stable prices under transparent
conditions, bringing clear benefits for consumers. A strong, efficient and
economically viable industry operating under market conditions would play a
more important, active role in managing stocks. It would also help to reduce
fleet overcapacity, one of the main causes of overfishing today.

Fishing sustainably is essential for the
future of coastal communities, which in some cases will need specific measures
to help manage their small-scale coastal fleets. The Commission proposes to
develop the CFP as part of the broader maritime economy. This will result in
more coherent policies for the EU’s seas and coastal areas, and a better
contribution to helping coastal regions diversify their sources of income so as
to ensure a better quality of life. Fish is the resource base of the industry.
It is also a source of healthy protein for human consumption. Making fishing
and aquaculture sustainable in coastal and rural areas is in the interest of
society at large, and will help to meet growing consumer demand for quality
fish and seafood.

The reform aims to create a fundamentally
different CFP:

·
Throwing fish overboard will be stopped and
stocks will be brought back to sustainable levels by 2015. Fisheries measures
will contribute to a healthy marine ecosystem. Management measures will be closer
to the reality of Member States and stakeholders.

·
Fishermen will take economic decisions to adjust
fleets to resources, small-scale fleets will improve their performance, and
income diversification will help to strengthen coastal communities.

·
When buying fish, consumers will have improved
information on the quality and sustainability of products.

·
EU funding will be limited to supporting
sustainability initiatives, and only those which comply with the rules.

·
In international and bilateral relations, the EU
will actively promote the CFP principles of sustainable fisheries and good
governance.

In July 2011, the Commission submitted its
proposals for reform of the CFP[31].
In order to deliver this reform and further implement the IMP, the Commission then
proposed a new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund[32] in December 2011.

Previously, in May 2011, the Commission
presented a report on deterring illegal activities in the fisheries sector:
genetics, genomics, chemistry and forensics to fight IUU (illegal, unreported
and unregulated) fishing and support for fish product traceability[33].

To efficiently implement traceability in
the fisheries sector and support control authorities, independent control
measures are needed. While molecular techniques based on genetics and chemistry
have great potential in this respect, they remain underutilised. To raise
awareness among stakeholders and to facilitate technology transfer, a report
produced by the European Commission’s JRC describes state-of-the-art molecular
technologies and discusses how these can be used for traceability and fisheries
control. It provides examples of cases where molecular techniques were employed
to reveal fisheries fraud, demonstrate the feasibility of the techniques. Also
explored are venues to bring forensic genetics and chemistry into a European
fisheries control and enforcement framework, within the context of EU policies
and legislation.

The JRC is collaborating with EUROSTAT to
carry out an analysis specifically of fisheries and aquaculture. The aim of the
study is to define and locate fishing- and aquaculture-dependent local
communities and analyse how important these activities are in terms of
employment opportunities.

The research is based on the analysis of
local connectivity networks in terms of focal points in coastal areas,
gravitation models and other spatial analysis methods derived from economic
geography approaches. Spatial information on aquaculture sites and fishing
ports is combined in a geographical context with socio-economic data on
fisheries, demographics and employment.

The preliminary results indicate that when
a more detailed geographical breakdown is considered, the role of fishing
activities for some local communities is more clearly apparent (up from 0.2 %
reported in previous studies for NUTS2 regions to 20-40 % in some local
fishing communities). The study will ultimately result in the mapping of areas
of gravitation of population and employment in respect of fishing ports and
aquaculture sites, and the quantification of the socio-economic role of fishing
and aquaculture activities in these areas.

1.5.2.     Aquaculture

At global level, aquaculture is the fastest
growing food production industry. It is increasingly compensating for fisheries
in meeting the growing demand for sea food and providing socio-economic
development opportunities to coastal and rural communities.

Despite this great potential, European
aquaculture remains stagnant. A number of reasons have been identified for this,
many falling within the competence of the Member States, others linked to EU
policies. One of the aims of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy is to
promote aquaculture growth through a coordinated approach based on non-binding
strategic guidelines, common priorities and exchange of best practice.

The European Commission’s JRC develops the
European Aquaculture Performance Indicators (EAPI), which include a set of
indicators on governance and on economic, social and environmental
sustainability for the three main aquaculture segments: marine, freshwater fin
fish and shellfish. In line with new priorities for aquaculture in the EU, the
indicators are developed to describe aquaculture production in the Member
States and to identify possible common priorities and targets for the
development of sustainable aquaculture activities.

2.           Cooperation
across sectors and borders to ensure optimum growth conditions for the maritime
economy

2.1.        Maximising
the sustainable pursuit of activities on coasts and at sea

The exploitation of coastal zone and marine
resources is an important field of economic activity in the EU. Several sectors
compete for space and resources across sea basins. Conflicts between sea users
and demands for sea space are expected to increase dramatically in the coming
years.

MSP and ICZM are linked concepts, as they
both address the use of coastal and maritime space and the management of human
activities. DG MARE and DG ENV have therefore decided to join forces in
developing and integrating MSP and ICZM further within the EU. The added value
of addressing MSP and ICZM jointly is also confirmed by stakeholder
consultations.

2.1.1.     Maritime
Spatial Planning (MSP)

Limited space and resource availability in
sea basins means that the organisation of activities in sea basins faces
important challenges in different policy areas, including the environment,
fisheries, maritime transport, offshore energy, etc. Each of these policies has
its own specific objectives, which might cause conflicts in implementation if
not dealt with in a coordinated way across sea basins. There
is a need for tools that enable growth by increasing efficiencies, streamlining
multiple activities and facilitating their coexistence.

Maritime spatial planning is a public
process for analysing and deciding the spatial and temporal distribution of
human activities in marine areas to achieve ecological, economic and social
objectives. It is a multi-sector tool to facilitate implementation of the
ecosystem approach and to support, within a given maritime space, the
reconciliation of concurrent human activities and the reconciliation of such activities
and their impact on the marine environment, without any built-in priority for
any type of claim on that space.

At EU level, MSP was identified as an
important tool for integrated sea use management and sustainable development
in the Blue Book of 2007[34]. Elements for a coherent
approach to MSP at EU level were set out in the 2008 Commission Communication ‘Roadmap
for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving Common Principles in the EU’[35].

In 2010, the Commission adopted a second
Communication on MSP entitled ‘Maritime Spatial Planning in the EU —
Achievements and future development’[36].
One of the main conclusions of this progress report was that there was broad
agreement among stakeholders to further develop a common approach to MSP at EU
level. The Communication also
confirmed the validity of the 10 key principles for good MSP governance:

Using MSP according to area and type of
activity

(1)
Defining objectives to guide MSP

(2)
Developing MSP in a transparent manner

(3)
Stakeholder participation

(4)
Coordination within Member States — simplifying
decision processes

(5)
Ensuring the legal effect of national MSP

(6)
Cross-border cooperation and consultation

(7)
Incorporating monitoring and evaluation in the
planning process

(8)
Achieving coherence between terrestrial and
maritime spatial planning — relationship with ICZM

(9)
A strong data and knowledge base.

In 2010, the Commission published a study on the economic benefits of MSP. The main conclusion was that
MSP can lead to significant economic benefits in terms of lower coordination
and transaction costs as well as a better investment climate. For three
scenarios, a reduction of 1% in transaction costs led to savings ranging from EUR 170
million to EUR 1.3 billion in 2020, a figure that can increase further due
to the acceleration of emerging activities such as renewable energy
installations. In 2011 the Commission published a study on the potential for
MSP in the Mediterranean[37]. The main conclusion was that there is potential for implementing
MSP in the Mediterranean sea but that the scope for coastal states to do so is
in most cases limited to their territorial seas, since up to now only very few
exclusive economic zones have been established in this sea basin.

Two 18-month preparatory actions on
cross-border cooperation on MSP were concluded in June 2012, one for the Baltic
Sea (Plan Bothnia) and one for the North Sea (MASPNOSE), both co-financed by the
EU. Each project involved bodies from different Member States and aimed to gain
practical experience of applying MSP in cross-border areas.

The Plan Bothnia[38] project looked into maritime spatial planning in the Baltic Sea.
Partners from Finland and Sweden as well as international institutions
participated in the project, coordinated by the HELCOM Secretariat. The MASPNOSE[39] project addressed maritime spatial planning in two areas in the
North Sea, the Thornton Bank and the Dogger Bank. It included partners from the
Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Denmark, coordinated by Wageningen University.
Both projects have provided concrete lessons for the cross-border application
of MSP and have further developed various aspects, such as the 10 key
principles for MSP referred to above
and the setting up of monitoring and evaluation systems.

An international conference on MSP, hosted
by Commissioner Damanaki, was held in Brussels on 26 March 2012. High-level representatives
from the European Union and third countries, public authorities,
representatives from maritime industries and NGOs had an opportunity to share
their experiences on MSP in the EU and around the world, and to reflect on how
they want to see it develop in the future.

2.1.2.     Integrated
Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)

Coastal zones are among the most densely
populated areas in the EU. A large share of their economic activities relate to
sea areas. This intensive and increasing use leads to the unsustainable use of
marine and coastal resources. The management of the interaction between uses of
coastal zones and the sea thus becomes increasingly important. This entails
moving from a sectoral approach to the management of European marine and
coastal areas to a more integrated and coherent decision-making process across
sea basins.

ICZM is a process tool aiming to achieve
integrated management of all policy processes affecting coastal zones. Its
added value[40]
is that it addresses the land and the sea simultaneously. The linkages between the
‘dry side’ (land) and ‘wet side’ (sea) of the coast are such that the
sustainable use of coastal/marine resources requires coordinated management of
activities. Existing EU legislation focuses either on the terrestrial side or on
the marine side. In the rare cases where land-sea interaction is considered,
not all relevant interactions are addressed[41].

In 2002, the Council and the European
Parliament adopted a Recommendation on ICZM[42]
defining the principles of sound coastal planning and management and referring
to the need for sound and shared knowledge, a long-term, adaptive approach, a
cross-sector perspective, the involvement of stakeholders, and consideration of
both the terrestrial and marine components of the coastal zone. Implementation of the EU ICZM Recommendation is fragmented and
progress remains slow. Member State action has improved since 2006[43], but the number of national
ICZM strategies remains small (5 out of 22 coastal Member States). An
evaluation of Member States’ progress reports on ICZM concluded that this
approach led to variation in the scope and level of activity[44]. The overall level of
implementation is evaluated at 50 %, with significant divergences between
Member States. Consequently, large potential benefits are not realised[45].

The ICZM Protocol to the Barcelona
Convention[46]
entered into force in March 2011. It makes ICZM compulsory for coastal Member
States in the Mediterranean.

In 2009, the working group report on the
follow-up to the EU ICZM Recommendation[47]
identified three policy options for detailed examination: a programme, a
revised recommendation and a directive. Regarding the content of the options,
the report signals that more focused objectives and deliverables would need to
be defined compared to the 2002 Recommendation.

In 2011, the comparative analysis of
OURCOAST cases[48]
concluded that there is significant experience with ICZM practice in Europe,
leading to improved coastal planning and management. The report provides
insights into success factors for and barriers to ICZM.

Reports were submitted by 16 coastal Member
States (out of 22)[49]
in 2011on a voluntary basis for the period 2006-2010. The study of Member State
progress reports on ICZM[50]
provides an overview of these Member State reports. It shows that some Member
States have advanced in terms of delivering a national ICZM strategy, with progress
on the ICZM principles, but large variations in scope and contents are
observed.

The 2011study on options for coastal
information systems[51]
analysed a selection of coastal information systems and subsequently identified
and assessed three policy options, with increasing degrees of ambition, to
improve coastal information systems to support ICZM implementation. As part of
this study, a stakeholder workshop was held on 6 May 2011.

In 2011, the JRC completed a study on the
impact of policy alternatives on European coastal zones 2000-2050[52]. The land-use modelling
results in this study indicate that the intensified trends towards built-up and
fragmented areas in Europe’s coastal zones compared to inland areas also hold
true under future scenarios.

A 2011 support study for an impact
assessment for a follow-up to the EU ICZM Recommendation[53] evaluated the different policy
options identified in the impact assessment.

2.1.3.     Public
consultation on MSP and ICZM

On 23 March 2011, DG MARE and DG ENV
launched a joint public web-based consultation on MSP and ICZM. A total of 225
contributions were received, including 109 responses from organisations. The
overall findings of this consultation were as follows:

·
Confirmation that conflicts in the use of sea
space are becoming more frequent and will continue in the future.

·
Confirmation of the usefulness of implementing
MSP in European waters and overall support of the work towards a common
approach within the EU.

·
Confirmation that EU action on cross-border
issues on MSP would be particularly useful.

·
Confirmation of the benefits and added value of
EU action on ICZM. There is still significant potential to achieve the full implementation
of ICZM principles.

·
Sustainable development remains an important
objective, with institutional coordination, coherent planning of the land and
sea parts of coastal zones, and integration across interests (social, economic
and environmental) forming the core tenets of ICZM.

·
There is scope to strengthen the basis of EU
ICZM policy, up to and including a binding but flexible legislative framework[54]. Support for ICZM through
studies, projects and research is considered important as well.

·
Confirmation of the need to ensure a strong link
between ICZM and MSP.

A public hearing on ICZM was organised on
30 May 2011[55].
It highlighted the need to consider the differences in coastal contexts and the
linkages between ICZM and MSP. The consultation has shown that the business
community, in particular those sectors involved in cross-border investments at
sea, such as transnational grids, is very much in favour of a European approach
to MSP and ICZM, since this is expected to reduce their operating costs and
facilitate the development of their activities.

2.2.        Protecting
European citizens and maritime industries against sea-related threats

2.2.1.     Integrated
maritime surveillance

European governments have an increasing
interest in ensuring safe, secure, and clean seas as fundamental conditions for
sustainable economic growth. Indeed, Europe’s external trade, with 90 % carried
by sea, needs increased protection by navies and police against piracy and
other forms of crime, Europe faces human trafficking carried out increasingly
at sea, fish stocks need to be protected against depletion, and the oceans and
seas need to be protected against land and seaborne pollution. More efficient
and cost-effective maritime surveillance is therefore a priority to ensure the sound,
sustainable and efficient use of the major opportunities offered by the EU
maritime domain.

The purpose of maritime surveillance is to provide
the necessary information to allow for effective supervision of all man-made
and natural occurrences at sea. Maritime surveillance is
the responsibility of about 400[56]
public authorities, mainly at Member State but also at EU level, carrying out seven
maritime surveillance functions: border control, customs, defence, fisheries
control, general law enforcement, marine environment, and maritime safety and security.
These seven functions involve many different initiatives at Member State level
(national and regional) as well as EU level. A number
of efforts have been made at both Member State and EU level to overcome
sectoral thinking by utilising the knowledge provided by combining sectoral
information. As a result, sectoral surveillance systems have been moving
towards at least partial cross-sectoral information exchange, thus picking up
the idea of creating a common information sharing environment[57]. In many cases, however, national
sectoral legislation depends on EU rules, so it is often not possible for
Member States to proceed on their own with the legal amendments necessary to
allow for appropriate data exchange between the seven different maritime
functions.

The Common Information Sharing Environment
(CISE) for the surveillance of the EU maritime domain is a concept that the
Commission has been working on since 2009 in close collaboration with the
Council and the Member States to provide an adequate policy response to the
current challenges. The immediate overarching objective of CISE is to improve
the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of maritime surveillance in the EU
maritime domain by enabling appropriate, lawful, secure and efficient data
sharing across sectors and borders throughout the EU in a decentralised
fashion.

Six steps have been identified in
the CISE Roadmap as fundamental preliminary work to be carried out before
establishing CISE[58].
In May 2011, Council Conclusions on the subject welcomed the Commission’s
Roadmap[59].

Step 1: Identifying all user communities

Seven user communities at EU level and
about 400 relevant authorities at national level have been identified as handling
information in about 20 mainly sectoral systems. This will remain a living
reference list open to adaptation by Member States.

Step 2: Mapping of data sets and gap
analysis

A Technical Advisory Group (TAG) was set up
to carry out four of the six CISE Roadmap steps. The Group is co-chaired by DG
MARE and JRC, which provides scientific and technical support to the TAG.
Within this setup, TAG established an overview of the main existing data types
relevant for maritime surveillance. This exercise revealed the existence of
over 500 data elements relevant to maritime surveillance across sectors and
borders. This list has constituted a useful reference for developing the other
steps of the Roadmap. TAG further found that, of the total information required
on a regular or sporadic basis by all seven user communities, 40 % to 90 %
is not yet made systematically available. This is due to the current lack of
information exchange across sectors and borders.

Step 3: Identifying common data
classification levels

TAG found that most data could be exchanged
at a non-classified level, even though arrangements need to be found for data
that are unclassified but of a sensitive nature, e.g. for commercial reasons.
Only few data require classification or higher security levels for exchange
through CISE. Existing security levels currently used in the various sectors to
classify information should not be modified by CISE.

Step 4: Developing the technical
supporting framework for CISE

A preliminary study is currently being
carried out by an external IT consultant essentially with a view to
understanding the diversity and functionality of the various IT tools used by
existing and forthcoming sectoral and regional systems. It aims to identify
reusable IT features or concepts and semantics and to propose possible IT choices
to interlink these systems in a decentralised manner. In doing so, the study
takes particular account of the functionalities already developed within
existing and planned systems.

Step 5: Establishing appropriate access
rights

As access rights are linked to particular
data elements, TAG is currently investigating the relevance of structuring data
elements into ‘purpose-oriented information service packages’ with
corresponding predefined ‘access rights’ based on the predefined maritime tasks
of the seven user communities. Such service packages would, of course, in any
case have to be taken up by Member States as the main stakeholders in maritime
surveillance.

Step 6: Ensuring compliance with legal
provisions

A study will soon be launched to identify
the legislative adjustments necessary to allow for the additional
cross-sectoral and cross-border information exchanges identified as necessary by
TAG. CISE will fill the gap by enabling such information exchange, thus
allowing authorities to carry out their maritime tasks more efficiently in the
future.

2.2.2.     MARSUNO
and BluemassMed

The results of two pilot projects MARSUNO[60] and BluemassMed[61] launched in December 2009 have
been regularly fed into the work of TAG under the relevant Roadmap Steps.

BlueMassMed is pilot project aiming to integrate
maritime surveillance in the Mediterranean Sea Basin over a period of two years.
It covers six different Member States and all seven user communities, with a
total of 37 different partners (authorities from the respective communities).
BluemassMed will deliver its final report in the third quarter of 2012.

Marsuno was a pilot project aiming to integrate
maritime surveillance in the North Sea Basin over a period of two years. It
covered nine different Member States and six (out of seven) user communities,
with a total of 24 different partners. MARSUNO submitted its final report at
the beginning of 2012, which contains a number of main outcomes and
recommendations[62]:

·
Harmonising the legal framework, a key
requirement for CISE to allow for cross-sectoral and cross-border information
exchange. This goes for both sectoral and horizontal legislation.

·
Solving the technical aspects involved in interlinking
all systems and authorities, which is equally crucial to the success of CISE.
Such work calls for common definitions, standards, procedures and semantics as
well as national CISE points of contact.

·
Managing CISE at three levels: (i) an Advisory
and Policy Board (APB) (Member State representatives), (ii) an Administrative
Advisory Group (to be designated by DG MARE) to work in cooperation with TAG to
support the APB, and (iii) specific Action Working Groups (on specific tasks).

·
Maximising efficiency and cost-effectiveness by
going beyond simply interlinking systems and authorities towards sharing
capabilities as well as developing and sharing maritime information services.

·
Enhancing civil/military cooperation.

·
Involvement of EU agencies in CISE information
exchange.

·
Deployment of common tools[63] and measures[64] to promote trust and willingness of user communities to cooperate.

·
Involving third countries in CISE.

2.2.3.     Joint
Research Centre — maritime surveillance research

In order to improve existing maritime
surveillance capabilities, research is being carried out into innovative
sensors, platforms and applications. New opportunities for maritime
surveillance are being explored using passive radars and MIMO coastal radars so
as to enhance the ability to detect maritime objects. In order to ensure consistent
situational awareness at sea and to overcome the differences between
surveillance data in terms of content, format, and spatial or temporal
resolution, the Blue Hub — a prototype data platform for the collection,
integration and analysis of global, regional and local vessel positioning data —
is being developed. Such research provides the scientific and technical support
needed for the conception, development, implementation and evaluation of
relevant EU policies, e.g. for GMES, CISE and EUROSUR.

2.2.4.     EU maritime
safety

The EU and its Member States are at the
forefront in improving maritime safety and promoting high-quality standards.
The aim is to eliminate sub-standard shipping, increase the protection of
passengers and crews, reduce the risk of environmental pollution, and ensure
that operators who follow good practices are not put at a commercial
disadvantage compared to those who are prepared to take short-cuts with vessel
safety.

The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA),
founded in 2002 and based in Lisbon, has the task of assisting the Commission
and Member States in this regard. Since 2000, the European Union has put in
place three packages of maritime safety legislation, the most recent (the Third
Maritime Safety Package) in 2009.

The Third Maritime Safety Package is made
up of eight legislative texts covering six policy themes linked to maritime
safety:

1. The quality of European flags

Directive 2009/21/EC aims to improve the
quality of European flags. As a major maritime power accounting for 25 %
of the world fleet, the European Union has to guarantee that all Member States
effectively verify that international standards are upheld by ships sailing
under their flags. This includes requiring EU Member States to implement the
International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) audit plan for national maritime
administrations and the certification of their quality management systems. The
IMO scheme is otherwise implemented only on a voluntary basis.

EU Member States declared their firm
commitment to adhere to the main international maritime safety conventions and
to apply the IMO Flag State Code, which gives a clear message to the
international maritime community that Europe is ready to lead by example.
Member States also undertook to further improve the quality and performance of
their maritime administrations.

2. Classification societies

Two legislative texts — Directive
2009/15/EC and Regulation (EC) 391/2009 — aim to improve the quality of the
work undertaken by classification societies. These bodies constitute a
fundamental link in the maritime safety chain: better performance by
classification societies means less room for sub-standard shipping at no
additional cost for safety-conscious owners. A specialised voluntary body
(QUASE) has been set up in order to audit and certify the quality management
systems of EU-recognised organisations to which Member States delegate the
inspection and statutory certification of their ships.

In addition, the recognition criteria will
be made stricter and a system of financial penalties will be established for
those organisations that do not do their job properly. If the shortcomings of a
recognised organisation are such that safety is no longer guaranteed, their
licence will be withdrawn. Furthermore, recognised organisations will now be
required to agree to mutual recognition of their certificates whenever they are
issued on the basis of equivalent technical standards.

3. Port State Control

Port State Control (PSC) is the inspection
of vessels in ports of countries other than the flag of the vessel in order to
verify that the competence of the master and officers on board, the condition
of a ship and its equipment comply with the requirements of international
conventions and that the vessel is manned and operated in compliance with
international law.

The EU regime for PSC is based on Directive
2009/16/EC, which re-cast and reinforced the previous legislation in this field
dating back to 1995. The EU regime is based on the pre-existing framework
provided by the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (PMoU) on Port State Control.
All maritime Member States as well as Canada, Russia, Croatia, Iceland and
Norway are signatories of the PMoU.

With the adoption of Directive 2009/16/EC, a
further step has been taken towards improving the effectiveness and quality of
the visits and inspections carried out by the port state in European ports,
while concentrating on the riskier and lower-performing ships and alleviating
the pressure on the high-quality ships. The PSC system has been thoroughly
reformed, by requiring inspection of all ships making a stopover in European
ports. The previous obligation for each Member State to inspect 25 % of
the ships calling at its ports has been replaced by a target of 100 % for
the EU as a whole.

These inspections will vary in frequency
depending on the risk the ships pose: the most dangerous ships will thus be
inspected every six months, while quality ships will be subject to less
frequent inspections. The Directive also strengthens the EU’s ability to keep sub-standard
ships out of European waters, by making it possible to ban any category of
ships, inserting a minimum time limit for a ban and introducing a permanent ban
for those ships that continue to flout the rules.

4. Traffic monitoring — assisting ships
in distress

Directive 2009/17/EC amends Directive
2002/59/EC to better assist ships in distress. A clear and precise legal
framework for refuge zones has been defined in order to ensure that the
authorities responsible for the designation of refuge zones take independent
decisions and possess the necessary means to do so.

As regards the monitoring of ships in
European waters, all Member States will be interconnected via SafeSeaNet, which
is a platform for data exchange between the national maritime administrations,
in order to obtain a complete overview of the movements of hazardous cargoes on
ships sailing in European waters. The Directive also provides for a European
Union Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT) Data Centre to process
long-range identification and tracking information on ships. Finally, the
automatic identification system is extended to fishing vessels over 15 metres,
in order to reduce the risk of collisions at sea.

5. Accident investigation

Directive 2009/18/EC establishes a common EU
framework in order to guarantee the effectiveness, objectivity and transparency
of inquiries following maritime accidents occurring in EU waters or involving
EU-flag ships or EU interests.

This involves the harmonisation of
technical inquiries, which are to be carried out following a common methodology
in accordance with the IMO Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and
Incidents. Accident investigations will be carried out independently of any
judicial inquiries. An information and analysis system on accidents at sea has
also been established.

6. Protection of victims

Two further measures have been put in place
to protect the victims of marine accidents.

Regulation (EC) 392/2009 affords further
protection for passengers in the aftermath of an accident. It introduces rules
on liability and insurance that will benefit passengers travelling on European
and domestic maritime routes.

The objective of this Regulation is to provide
all passengers travelling in Europe by ship and the carriers themselves with a
harmonised legal framework setting out their rights and obligations in the
event of an accident. This harmonisation should aim to ensure not only fairer
compensation for loss or damage, but also improved accident prevention.

Regulation (EC) 392/2009 incorporates into
EU law the 2002 Protocol to the 1974 Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage
of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea (‘the Athens Convention’), adopted under
the auspices of the IMO. The Athens Convention sets out clearly the rights and
obligations of passengers and carriers: it provides for a system of strict
liability — ‘liability without fault’ — of the carrier in respect of loss or
damage in the event of shipping incidents, lays down sufficiently high maximum
compensation amounts, requires all carriers to take out an insurance policy and
allows the complainant to claim compensation from the insurer directly. The
Regulation makes a number of adjustments. In particular, it extends the scope of
the Convention to include international maritime transport, and also to cover main
cabotage lines (maritime transport within a single Member State) according to a
specified timetable.

Directive 2009/20/EC on the insurance of
shipowners for maritime claims represents a major step in establishing a
minimum set of rules for the insurance of ship owners. It requires that all
ships flying the flag of a Member State (throughout the world) and all ships
entering a maritime area under the jurisdiction of a Member State have
insurance cover. The cover must correspond to the ceilings set out in the IMO Convention
on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (1996 version). Whether or
not the ship is carrying an insurance certificate can be verified during an
inspection under Directive 2009/16/EC. Where the ship is not carrying a certificate,
it may be detained or even expelled, without prejudice to any financial
penalties to be determined by each Member State.

The transposition deadlines for five of the
six Directives in the package have now elapsed. While only 40 % of the
Member States managed to transpose them on time, additional notifications are
received on a daily basis from Member States and full transposition is
expected. The Commission also has to verify that the above Directives are
correctly implemented. If necessary, it can initiate infringement proceedings.

EMSA

In May 2012 the inter-institutional
political negotiations on the Regulation founding EMSA were concluded. The
revised Regulation will extend EMSA’s core tasks and will add a number of
ancillary tasks. Among the most important is that EMSA has to provide a
response to marine pollution caused by oil and gas installations and also to work
to facilitate the establishment of a European maritime transport space without
barriers. EMSA will continue to provide assistance to the Commission and Member
States as well as to Neighbourhood countries.

2.2.5.     Enhancing
maritime transport security

A technology
(CONTRAFFIC) has been developed by the Joint Research Centre, in collaboration
with the European Anti-Fraud Office, to automatically gather and analyse data
on global maritime container movements to identify potentially suspicious
consignments. The Contraffic project is carried out under the mutual assistance
arrangements between EU customs authorities. The system has been successfully
tested to identify false declarations of origin used to circumvent anti-dumping
duties and quotas or to smuggle prohibited or counterfeited goods.

Contraffic’s
data is gathered systematically from a number of online sources and is
independent of customs declarations. Contraffic’s risk analysis focuses
exclusively on container itineraries and complements other risk analysis done
by customs authorities. All EU customs authorities have access to Contraffic,
which is used routinely together with other systems in joint customs exercises.

2.2.6.     Securing
Europe’s maritime borders

Securing Europe’s maritime borders is an
increasingly crucial challenge for Member States. On 12 December 2011, the
Commission proposed a Regulation establishing the European Border Surveillance
System[65]
(EUROSUR). The aim of EUROSUR is to reinforce control of the Schengen external
borders. It will provide a mechanism for Member State authorities carrying out
border surveillance activities to share operational information and to cooperate
with each other and with Frontex and EMSA in order to reduce the loss of life
at sea and the number of irregular immigrants entering the EU undetected, and
to increase internal security by preventing cross-border crimes, such as
trafficking in human beings and the smuggling of drugs. EUROSUR should become
operational from 1 October 2013.

2.3.        Maritime
employment and career mobility

The economic sectors that together make up
the maritime economy are interlinked and jointly constitute a vast reservoir of
jobs that is currently not being exploited to its full capacity. Crucial to
fulfilling this potential and increasing mobility of workers will be
transparency and mobility with regard to both skills and qualifications.The
Commission has made an exhaustive inventory of all actions under EU policies
that are relevant for employment in the maritime economy. This document was
published together with the Communication on Blue Growth in September 2012[66].

3.           Research,
knowledge and end-users: bridging the gap between research nd industry

3.1.        Ensuring
European maritime leadership through innovation and research

The EU Strategy for marine and maritime
research was adopted in September 2008 by the Commission, and endorsed by the
Council in December 2008. It follows a specific commitment made in the Action
Plan for the EU Maritime Policy adopted by the Commission in October 2007. It
is an essential part of the EU’s integrated maritime policy. The strategy seeks
essentially to provide the scientific basis to support the Maritime Policy goal
of maximising the value of the maritime economy in a sustainable manner.

The Strategy has been implemented since the
end of 2008, following an implementation roadmap, steered by an inter-service
group involving DGs MARE, ENV, JRC, MOVE, ENER and ENTR. Among other aspects,
the strategy highlights the importance of integration between established
marine and maritime research disciplines in order to reinforce excellence in
science, with a view to addressing complex sea-related issues. To this end, it
provides for the launching of joint calls under FP7 on major research topics
requiring a cross-thematic approach. The ‘Ocean of Tomorrow’ joint calls thus represent
a concrete step in the implementation of the strategy. The Communication calls
for a progress report on the implementation of the strategy to be presented to
the Council by the beginning of 2013.

Three 3 FP7 joint calls[67] have brought together efforts
of up to 5 Directorates for a total EU contribution of 134M€. This effort was
complemented with the launch of 9 coordinated topics in 2012 in order to
support the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive[68] for a total EU contribution of
€42 million.

Besides the cross-thematic calls, within
the first four years of FP7, 644 projects with either a marine-related
dimension or potential applications for the maritime sector were selected for
funding with an EU financial contribution of about EUR 1.4 billion. This
corresponds to about 6.4 % of the funding awarded by the EU to all
proposals selected under FP7 during the period and 5 % in terms of the
number of proposals.

Projects financed in
FP7 cover for instance multi-use offshore platforms (MERMAID,
H2OCEAN, TROPOS), combining several services of these platforms to optimise use
of marine space and provide an adequate return on these substantial investments.
Another example is the GAP2 project, which seeks to develop inclusive
governance for fisheries involving stakeholders, scientists and managers in support
to the Common Fisheries Policy.

Other initiatives aiming to foster
synergies between and with Member States, such as ERA-NETs (SEAS-ERA, Martec II,
etc.), an Article 185 initiative for the Baltic Sea (BONUS) and the JPI
initiative on ‘Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans’ (JPI Oceans), have
sought to address challenges affecting the oceans in a cross-cutting way since
2009.

Better integration between marine and
maritime research communities has also been sought through improved governance
mechanisms (the MARCOM+ forum, the EMAR2RES partnership), with a view to improving
interactions between them and the European Commission.

In order to facilitate integration of and
access to a range of marine data acquired by in-situ marine observation
infrastructures, the Commission has supported a marine infrastructure project
(SeaDataNet). SeaDataNet has been instrumental in the development of the
European Marine Observation Data Network (EMODNET) by DG MARE. DG RTD has also
undertaken work with an expert group to develop a vision for integrating marine
observation infrastructures (including marine ESFRI projects) in Europe.

3.2.        Sharing
marine knowledge to facilitate innovation, investment and sound policy-making

The aim of the European Marine Observation
and Data Network (EMODnet) is to improve access to marine data and so reduce
costs to users, stimulate innovation and reduce uncertainty about the behaviour
of the seas and oceans.

An impact assessment[69] has shown that once the
present fragmented marine data infrastructure is rationalised, those involved
in marine and maritime activities will gain EUR 300 million in competitiveness
and another EUR 200 million a year will be generated through innovative
new products and services.

To test how this could be done, a number of
preparatory actions were started in the period 2008-2010. Thematic groups,
selected through calls for tender and supported by procurement contracts, set
up portals to provide access to marine data, metadata and data products for entire
sea basins. 53 different organisations participated in the projects, largely
public bodies responsible for managing marine data on a national scale but also
including some small private companies with expertise in managing distributed
data. All the metadata and data products and most of the data are made
available to users free of charge and without any restrictions on use. A total
of EUR 6 450 000 was committed.

The aim is not to construct a giant
database; the data themselves may remain in separate archives but should be
accessible through a single entry point or portal. Each data category requires
a separate approach, so six different portals have been set up:

(1)
hydrography — bathymetry (water depth),
coastlines, underwater features (wrecks etc.)

(2)
geology — sediments, strata, coastal erosion,
geological hazards

(3)
physics — temperature, waves, currents, sea level,
light penetration

(4)
chemistry — concentrations of chemicals in
water, sediments and biota

(5)
biology — abundance of living species

(6)
physical habitats — habitat classification based
on physical parameters (water depth, light penetration, sediments etc.)

The funding for the preparatory actions was
not sufficient to allow the portals to cover data from all European seas, so
each one covers a subset of the sea basins. Each includes the North Sea and at
least two other basins. All European seas subject to the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive[70],
except Macaronesia[71],
are included in at least one portal. The portals should provide access to:

(1)
data — raw observations or measurements

(2)
metadata — information about the data such as
location and time of measurement, units, precision

(3)
data products — products derived from the data;
normally by interpolation in space and time. Data products include digital
terrain models on regular grids or geological maps. Thus, users can obtain
estimates of parameter values between measurement points.

The contract for one of the portals,
physical parameters, only began at the end of 2010, so no conclusions can be
drawn yet. The portals provide access not only to the data themselves but also
to data products. Thus, rather than being limited to information at a discrete
set of measurement points, users are able to obtain information on parameters
such as sediment type, water depth and habitat type at all points in the sea basin.

The work of the groups was closely
monitored by the Commission, the European Environment Agency and an independent
Marine Observation and Expert Group. An Expert Group monitored the projects and
hosted a number of meetings where public authorities and the marine industry explained
their needs for data[72].
The offshore wind industry, cable laying companies and those in charge of
protecting coastlines against erosion have all expressed strong support for the
European Marine Observation and Data Network.

The portals allow users to obtain an
overview of available data and data products and to download data for use.
Public bodies spend over one a half billion euros every year on collecting
marine data. For a proportionally small outlay, many of these previously
inaccessible data have become available. The cost reflects not only the work
done in processing the data to common standards but also the agreement of data
providers to release data.

The effectiveness of the portals was
checked through a specific contract[73].
The consultants, MRAG Ltd, were given the task of checking the operation of the
portals for user-friendliness and fitness for purpose, based on:

(1)
mutual awareness through common six-monthly
meetings;

(2)
examination by peers (the independent 28-member
Marine Observation and Expert Group[74]
attend the ur-EMODnet mutual awareness meetings and deliver opinions on
progress);

(3)
assessment by the Commission and EU agencies.

All the portals were found to be intuitive
to use, with all of them, apart from the physical habitats one, providing a
searchable catalogue and a map interface for retrieving records. The data
quality indicators were generally clear and useful for the data products
assembled during the projects. The information on the quality of the underlying
data sets was sometimes harder to interpret if the set was composed of data
from more than one provider.

The Marine Observation and Data Expert
Group met four times a year. At two of these meetings, the work of the thematic
data assembly group working was presented. Summaries of all meetings and copies
of all presentations are publicly available on the EU maritime forum[75].

There is now a better understanding of the
data policies of the hundreds of data holders within the EU. Hydrographic
offices are still reluctant to release their highest-resolution data. However,
a Memorandum of Understanding with the International Hydrographic Organisation has
now been signed and this should enable a structured dialogue on how data
policies could be liberalised.

The initiative meshes well with other EU
initiatives, including Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), the
Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), the Data Collection Framework in fisheries and the Marine Framework
Strategy Directive.

4.           The
territorial benefits of maritime policy

4.1.        Regional
policy

The Communication ‘Regional Policy
contributing to smart growth in Europe 2020’[76], calls for national and
regional governments to design ‘smart specialisation strategies’. It announces
the setting-up of a Smart Specialisation Platform to assist regions and Member
States in this task. The platform will act as a facilitator bringing together
the relevant policy support activities in research, regional, enterprise,
innovation and education policies, and informing on funding opportunities under
the relevant EU funding programmes. RTD, ENTR, EAC and INFSO, together with
REGIO and the JRC, will run the platform, which will be established at the
Joint Research Centre (ITTPS) in Seville.

Several maritime projects have been
supported through the EU regional policy funds, such as: an autonomous,
environmentally friendly and efficient floating desalination unit (Greece); the
Wave Hub project, which provides shared offshore infrastructure for the demonstration
and proving of arrays of wave-energy generation devices over a sustained period
of time (UK); a project in West Wales on growth in environmental marine
science, etc.

4.1.1.     Cross-border
maritime cooperation

Cross-border maritime cooperation has been
promoted by several EU Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes in the sea basin
areas of the English Channel, North Sea, Irish Sea and the Mediterranean Sea.
This cross-border cooperation is a good model for further developing a
regionalised approach towards IMP. Some projects carried out so far include:

English Channel and North Sea

·
LICCO: to empower Channel communities to adapt
to coastal climate change.

·
CHARM3 — CHANNEL INTEGRATED APPROACH FOR MARINE
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: to contribute to the preservation of Channel marine
resources by enhancing knowledge of marine resources and by providing new tools
to improve the sustainable management of the Channel area.

·
DIESE: to assess the threat of endocrine
disruption (ED), immunotoxicity and carcinogenicity in freshwater and marine
ecosystems of the Channel area in order to ensure the sustainable development
of aquaculture and better water quality.

·
MERIFIC: to advance the adoption of marine
energy on the island of le Parc Naturel Marin d’Iroise and the Isles of Scilly.

·
A2S-Archaeological Atlas of the 2 Seas project: to
enhance our understanding of the submerged heritage of the Channel and southern
North Sea.

Irish Sea

·
SMART COAST: to equip Irish and Welsh
communities to maintain the economic and strategic value of their near-shore
waters by facilitating the use of new real-time management systems.

·
SUSFISH: to produce guidelines for future
fisheries management, ensuring sustainable development of the shellfish
industry in Ireland and Wales for the next 50-100 years. This will be achieved
by assessing the effects of climate change (via oceanographic models) on
shellfish productivity in the Irish Sea and determining adaptation or
mitigation strategies for the industry in the cross-border area, including
recommendations for protection of certain areas under MSP.

·
ISLES: to assess the opportunities, challenges
and barriers to developing an offshore grid infrastructure. This will ensure greater
cooperation and energy trading between the countries in the area.

·
BIOMARA: to investigate both macro-algae
(seaweeds) and single-celled microalgae as potential sources of biofuel. The
project includes a techno-economic evaluation of potential systems,
environmental impact assessment and ongoing stakeholder engagement to ensure
that the ultimate findings of the research have wide applicability.

·
SAIL WEST — to provide a cohesive marine leisure
development strategy for the areas of Donegal, Sligo, the maritime counties of
Northern Ireland and the west coast of Scotland.

Mediterranean sea

·
MAREMED: to develop innovative approaches to
territorial governance by improving the coordination of regional maritime
policies with each other and with other levels of governance, in particular the
national, European and Mediterranean levels. Specific themes are addressed:
integrated management of coastal and maritime areas, fisheries, adaptation to
climate change in coastal areas, efforts to reduce pollution, and data
management.

·
SHAPE: to develop a multi-level, cross-sector
governance system, based on integrated management of natural resources, risk
prevention and conflict resolution among uses and users of the Adriatic coast
and sea. Project activities promote the application of the Integrated Coastal
Zone Management Protocol in the Mediterranean and a Roadmap for Maritime
Spatial Planning in the Adriatic region.

·
MEDESS-4MS: to prevent maritime risks and
strengthen maritime safety in relation to oil spill pollution in the
Mediterranean. The project will deliver an integrated operational multi-model
oil spill prediction service in the Mediterranean, connected to existing
monitoring platforms (CleanSeaNet, AIS), and using well-established oil spill
modelling systems, data from the Marine Core Services and national ocean
forecasting systems.

Atlantic Area

·
BIOTECMAR — BIOTEChnological exploitation of
MARine products and by-products. The overall aim is to help companies in the Atlantic
area (which are mainly SMEs) make use of modern biotechnological tools and to contribute
to diversification of activities concerned with marine biomass exploitation
with strict attention to the sustainable management of marine natural
resources.

·
MARMED: to develop innovative biomedical
products from marine resources. The project aims to exploit marine residues and
sub-products from several companies in the marine sector, with demonstration of
real cases (collaboration with industries as proof-of-concept), and to
demonstrate the added value and high potential for using such materials (marine
origin biopolymers and ceramics) in biomedical applications, also with close
industrial collaboration in order to evaluate the market potential of the
applications to be developed and/or studied in the project.

·
NETALGAE — Inter-regional network to promote
sustainable development in the marine algae industry. The aim is to create a
Europe-wide network of relevant stakeholders in the marine macro-algae sector
and to carry out a wide-ranging policy study to establish a best-practice model
and suggest policies for successful and sustainable commercial utilisation of
marine macro-algae resources.

·
PHARMATLANTIC — Knowledge Transfer Network for
Prevention of Mental Diseases and Cancer in the Atlantic Area. The aim is to inform
industries situated on the Atlantic seaboard about research and innovation advances
in medical prevention.

·
SHAREBIOTEC — Sharing life science
infrastructures and skills to support the biotechnology sector in the Atlantic
area. The main objective is to strengthen the biotechnology sector by maximising
the benefits of life science infrastructures and skills for the development of
the Atlantic area, which has notable areas of excellence (marine science, the variety
and increasing number of SMEs, policy initiatives) but also weaknesses.

4.1.2.     Proposal
for EU structural policy 2014-2020

EU cohesion policy has been a force for
change over the last ten years, making a genuine contribution to convergence
and growth in the EU by directly creating over one million jobs and investing
in training to improve the employability of over ten million people. To
continue this work in the future and strengthen the focus on European economic
priorities, the European Commission adopted on 6 October 2011 a legislative
package for cohesion policy for the period from 2014 until 2020. It is designed
to boost growth and jobs across Europe by targeting EU investment on Europe’s
Growth and Jobs Agenda (Europe 2020).

The European Commission considers that
cohesion policy, rural development and maritime and fisheries policies should
remain essential elements of the 2014-20 financial package because of their
pivotal role in delivering the Europe 2020 strategy. It has therefore proposed
that structural policies should concentrate funding on a smaller number of
priorities strongly linked to the Europe 2020 strategy, focusing on results,
monitoring progress towards agreed objectives and simplifying delivery.

The focus on fewer investment priorities in
line with these objectives will be at the heart of the new Partnership
Contracts, to be agreed by the Member States with the European Commission. They
will set clear targets and set aside a financial performance reserve to reward
regions who do best in reaching their goals. To ensure that the impact of EU
investments on growth and jobs is not undermined by unsound macro-economic
policies or by weak administrative capacity, the Commission can ask to review
programmes, or suspend funding if remedial action is not taken.

The impact of the funds will also be
strengthened by simplifying and harmonising the rules of different funds,
including rural development and maritime and fisheries. A more integrated
approach will make sure the various funds serve coherent goals and strengthen
each other’s impact.

Sea basin
strategies are specifically referred to in the Regulation laying down common
provisions for the European Regional Development Fund,
the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for
Rural Development (EAFRD), and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund[77]. It will increase coherence among these instruments to ensure better
synergies and greater impact. In the Partnership
Contracts, Member States are to take into account, where appropriate,
macro-regional and sea basin strategies. European territorial cooperation is
particularly important because in some contexts such as sea basins and coastal
regions, cooperation and transnational action are indispensable to support
growth, employment and ecosystem-based management.

4.2.        Sea
basin strategies

4.2.1.     A maritime
strategy for the Atlantic area

The Atlantic Strategy was adopted by the
Commission on 21 November 2011[78].
It aims to help create sustainable jobs and growth in the Atlantic area. A
high-level ministerial event was organised in Lisbon by the Portuguese
administration (28-29 November 2011) for its official launch.

The Atlantic Strategy highlights the
following five challenges and opportunities:

·
Implementing the ecosystem approach

·
Reducing Europe’s carbon footprint

·
Sustainable exploitation of the Atlantic
seafloor’s natural resources

·
Responding to threats and emergencies

·
Socially inclusive growth

The Strategy formally launched an Atlantic
Forum to allow Member States, the European Parliament, regional authorities,
civil society and representatives of existing and emerging industries to
contribute. It will include a set of workshops focusing on the challenges and
opportunities outlined above and a think tank to suggest options for achieving
objectives.

The Atlantic Forum is led by a Leadership
Group and steered by a Steering Group, which both meet regularly. The Forum is
to focus on delivering proposals that are innovative, have an EU dimension and
can provide a lever for growth and employment in the Atlantic area. The intention
is to link the Forum’s deliverables to future EU financial instruments. Concretely,
the Forum should put forward priority actions and project proposals to develop
the blue economy. The Commission has also visited each Atlantic Member State to
raise awareness of the Atlantic Forum and Cohesion Policy processes and to
encourage Member States and local authorities to identify Atlantic priority
actions with a view to the Cohesion Policy negotiations and the Atlantic Action
Plan.

4.2.2.     EU
strategy for the Baltic Sea Region

The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region
(EUSBSR), adopted by the Commission in June 2009[79], and endorsed by the European
Council in October 2009, responds to the key challenges facing the region, such
as improving the marine environment, addressing transport bottlenecks, energy
links and maritime safety and security issues, and ensuring prosperity and economic
growth.

The EUSBSR provides regional implementation
of the EU’s integrated maritime policy. Maritime policy serves as a cross-cutting
policy linking different priority areas and integrating horizontal actions within
the Strategy.

In 2011, after two years of implementation,
the Commission reported that while the implementation process points to issues
needing to be further addressed, including better alignment of funding and
policies, and a reinforced organisational structure, the Strategy contributes
positively to enhanced cooperation in the region[80].

The Strategy brings together the maritime
community in the region. In fisheries, the BaltFish Forum provides an
opportunity to develop and test new regional approaches to fisheries management.
The two successfully completed flagship projects under the Strategy, MARSUNO
and the Baltic Sea Maritime Functionalities study, pave the way for more
comprehensive cooperation between maritime authorities. The ‘Clean-ship’ project
aims to significantly reduce pollution from ships. Principles agreed jointly by
VASAB and HELCOM provide the basis for preparing cross-border ecosystem-based
plans. Furthermore, the Strategy serves as a pioneer in paving the way, within
the next financial perspective 2014-2020, for better streamlining of EU,
national and regional funding instruments to achieve the objectives of
macro-regional and sea basin strategies.

In response to the Council recommendations
and requests of 15 November 2011 to review the Strategy, the Commission adopted
in March 2012 a Communication recommending improvements to the strategic focus
of the Strategy, calling for closer alignment of policies and funding,
highlighting the importance of maintaining high-level political commitment and
ensuring better communication, and clarifying the responsibilities of different
actors.

The revised Strategy endorsed by the
Council in June 2012 is firmly based within the Europe 2020 agenda and
concentrates on three main mutually reinforcing objectives — to save the sea,
to connect the region and to increase prosperity — each accompanied by
indicators and targets.

The ‘Save the Sea’ objective supports the
various efforts to secure good environmental status and biodiversity in the sea,
such as reducing nutrient inputs and promoting clean shipping, and stresses the
importance of regional cooperation, including cooperation with HELCOM, with a
view to ensuring maritime safety and security and facilitating sustainable
growth.

4.2.3.     The
Mediterranean dimension of IMP

The Mediterranean is the largest shared sea
basin in Europe with more than 21 coastal states.

In March 2011, the EU set new objectives
for the region, focusing on building a partnership for democracy and shared
prosperity based on comprehensive institution-building, dialogue on migration,
mobility and security, and further sectoral cooperation, notably in the fields
of the environment, transport, energy and employment. The need for a more
strategic approach and cooperation on maritime affairs was underlined.

The IMP actions being taken forward in the
Mediterranean are part and parcel of the EU’s objectives for the region. The
Commission Communication on improving governance in the Mediterranean[81], adopted in 2009, was the
starting point for this process.

With improved understanding by coastal states
of their rights and duties at sea comes greater responsibility and better capacity
for enforcement of the applicable rules. A study has been carried out by the
Commission to obtain further knowledge of the costs and benefits of existing
and potential maritime zones and areas in the Mediterranean sea on the basis of
UNCLOS. This analysis could be of help to policy-makers at national level and to
stakeholders.

The EU is a Party to the Barcelona Convention
for the protection of the marine and coastal
environment and is actively supporting its efforts to
achieve and maintain good environmental status of the marine and coastal
environment in the Mediterranean, in particular through the implementation of
the Ecosystem Approach. The Barcelona Convention is the regional forum
supporting the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by
Mediterranean EU Member States.

Steps have been taken to stimulate
effective dialogue and exchanges of best practice with non-EU partners in the
region. The regional Working Group on IMP in the
Mediterranean, set up in November 2009, provides an effective platform for
debate on sectoral developments with an impact on the sea. Through this
platform, among others, key regional conventions, such as the Barcelona
Convention and GFCM, have come to see the need for more consistency in their
respective programmes of work. An MoU between the Barcelona Convention and GFCM
is under preparation to this end.

With support from the IMP-MED project, partners
under the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) have benefited from capacity building
for key regional developments of a cross-cutting nature (Marine Protected Areas,
underwater culture heritage, offshore pollution, maritime surveillance, etc.).
Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, in particular, have taken steps towards
definition of a national roadmap for integrated maritime policy making. The
other five partners in the project are endeavouring to stimulate inter-ministerial
discussions at various levels.

Innovative ways for stimulating private
sector investment in the maritime sectors of the southern partners are being
devised by the Commission in cooperation with the EIB and IMO. An ongoing
feasibility study under the FEMIP Trust Fund is looking into maritime
infrastructures, maritime training, and safety and surveillance capacities.
Follow-up proposals will be presented at a FEMIP ministerial meeting on
maritime affairs early in 2013.

Research institutes and universities from
across the region have come together to work on two major cross-thematic
projects under FP7 (Oceans for Tomorrow): PERSEUS — ‘Assessing and predicting
the combined effects of natural and human-made pressures in the Mediterranean
and the Black Sea in view of their better governance’ — with a total
contribution of EUR 13 million, and COCONET — ‘Knowledge base and tools
for regional networks of Marine Protected Areas, integrated management of
activities, assessment of wind energy potential in the Mediterranean and the Black
Sea’, with a total contribution of EUR 9 million.

As mentioned above, regions and Member States
have redirected some of their 2007-2013 funding for European territorial
cooperation in the Mediterranean to focus on IMP objectives. The year 2013 will
be dedicated to pulling these experiences together and engaging further with
the Mediterranean Member States so as to ensure that future Cohesion Policy
funding and horizontal funding programmes (Horizon 2020, LIFE+, EIB loans) can
effectively address maritime investment priorities in the region.

Since 2006, the JRC has been continuously
measuring air pollutants during spring, summer and autumn from an automated
monitoring station placed on a cruise ship following a fixed course in the
Western Mediterranean. This provides data on air pollution from areas where
such observations are lacking, thus filling a gap left by the existing
observational networks. The measurements focus on air pollutants with a
potential impact on climate in the Mediterranean area (ozone, black carbon,
particles). Their main purpose is to obtain information about sources of air
pollution in the area, particularly the contribution from shipping, and to
understand how atmospheric processes in the area influence the distribution of
pollutants. The measurements have been used for testing inventories of ship
emissions used in atmospheric transport models. Recently, measurements
performed on the ship while at berth in harbours have been used to investigate
the impact of an EU Directive on the allowed sulphur content of ship fuels used
in harbours. It was found that the Directive had brought about a clear
improvement in air quality in these Mediterranean harbours.

4.2.4.     Adriatic-Ionian
Sea basins

Italy, Slovenia, Greece and Croatia Croatia
together with the other countries of the sub-region have taken up the challenge
of engaging in deeper maritime cooperation at sub-regional level in the
Adriatic and Ionian Seas. A maritime strategy is being consolidated by the
Commission to this end, to be followed by an Action Plan in 2013. A set of
priority areas will be proposed for cooperation and for streamlining current
and future EU funding for the region. The countries have agreed to enhance
cooperation at sea basin level with a view to improved growth and employment in
the maritime sectors, long-term sustainable and responsible fishing, good
environmental status of the marine environment, and a safer and more secure
sea. Meetings of contact points from the eight Adriatic-Ionian countries are
organised regularly to steer the process. A series of three workshops have been
organised to gather input for possible priorities, actions and projects, raise
awareness of the strategy and build ownership.

4.2.5.     Black
Sea

An inclusive dialogue with maritime public
authorities and stakeholders from Bulgaria and Romania has been launched with a
dedicated brainstorming event. The event identified areas and actions on which
the IMP should focus in the Black Sea (notably maritime surveillance between
Member States and more coordinated regional initiatives on marine and maritime
research, protection of the marine and coastal environment, integrated coastal
zone management and fisheries management).

Bulgaria and Romania have started a
bilateral dialogue to discuss how to enhance maritime surveillance in the Black
Sea.

Maritime policy is understood to provide a
useful framework for linking the EU’s external and internal dimensions and
enhancing the EU’s role in Black Sea regional cooperation. Efforts have been made
to explain the objectives of the IMP through contacts (also at high level) with
stakeholders and regional organisations (Black Sea Commission for the
protection of the marine and coastal environment, Black Sea Economic
Cooperation) and to understand the possible role that these organisations can
play in implementing the IMP.

4.2.6.     EU
policy towards the Arctic

The Arctic is a vital component of the
Earth’s environment, but climate change is affecting the region more and faster
than most other parts of the world, disturbing its ecosystem and the
traditional livelihoods of those living there. At the same time, the retreating
ice and technological progress are opening up new economic opportunities in the
region, such as shipping, mining, energy extraction and fishing. While
beneficial for the global economy, these activities also call for a prudent
approach: further repercussions for the fragile Arctic can be expected if strict
environmental standards are not met.

In order to respond to these challenges,
the European Commission and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy adopted on 26 June 2012 a Communication proposing steps for the
EU’s constructive engagement in the Arctic[82].
It contains a set of tangible actions, from contributing to research and
sustainable development in the region to promoting environmentally friendly
technologies that could be used for sustainable shipping and mining. It also
looks back at the EU’s activities in the Arctic since 2008. The EU has
contributed EUR 20 million to Arctic research every year over the last
decade and has invested more than EUR 1.14 billion in the sustainable
development of the region since 2007. The Communication also aims to kickstart
a dialogue and consultation process with the Arctic countries, indigenous
peoples and other interested parties to further refine the EU’s policy towards
the Arctic.

The Communication contains a series of
measures to support effective stewardship of the Arctic. They include:

·
Supporting Arctic research under the Commission’s
proposed EUR 80 billion Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme;

·
Contributing to search and rescue in the Arctic with
the launching of next-generation observation satellites;

·
Stepping up actions to combat climate change;

·
Committing to establish a legally binding global
instrument to cover the use of mercury;

·
Using the EU funding to maximise sustainable
development in the Arctic for the benefit of local and indigenous communities;

·
Promoting and developing environmentally
friendly technologies that could be used by extractive industries in the
Arctic;

·
Enhancing bilateral dialogue on Arctic issues
with Canada, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation and the United States;

·
Stepping up efforts to hold regular dialogues
with representatives of indigenous peoples.

5.           Protecting
marine ecosystems — a condition and factor for growth

5.1.        The
challenge of healthy marine ecosystems: implementing the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive

5.1.1.     Progress
in MSFD implementation

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
aims to achieve good environmental status (GES) for the EU’s marine waters by
2020 and to protect the resource base upon which marine-related economic and
social activities depend[83].
The Directive enshrines in a legislative framework the ecosystem approach to
the management of human activities with an impact on the marine environment,
integrating the concepts of environmental protection and sustainable use.

In 2010, the Commission adopted a Decision
on criteria and methodological standards to achieve good environmental status
in marine waters[84].
This Decision was based on substantial scientific research and will be used by
Member States for further implementation. The Decision also recognises the need
for regular updates based on scientific information and for the adoption of
management measures, in line with the 6-year cycle under the Directive.

Together with Member States, the Commission
has set up an informal Common Implementation Strategy, with a series of
meetings (including a high-level meeting of Marine Directors for each EU
Presidency), to develop a common understanding in the process of policy
development. In parallel, the European Commission is stepping up its activity in
the various Regional Sea Conventions around Europe, which perform the role of
facilitating regional coordination by Member States in the implementation of
the Directive.

In 2011, the Commission also produced a
Staff Working Paper on the relationship between the initial assessment of
marine waters and the criteria for good environmental status[85].

Article 19 of the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive (MSFD) requires each Member State to organise public consultations on
the implementation of the Directive. These took place in the first part of
2012. Member States have to ensure that all interested parties are given early
and effective opportunities to participate, involving, where possible, existing
management bodies or structures.

The MSFD has seen further important
milestones with the preparation by 15 July 2012 and reporting by 15th
October of the initial assessments (Article 8), the determination of good
environmental status (Article 9) and the establishment of environmental targets
(Article 10) by the Member States. This will be followed by a Commission
analysis and recommendations to the Member States (Article 12). An assessment
of the role of the MSFD in implementing various marine global and EU
commitments, according to article 20, is also underway.

Financing for the IMP is in line with
Article 22 MSFD, which specifies the need for ‘Community financing’ in the
establishment of the marine strategies by stating that ‘the implementation
of this Directive shall be supported by existing Community financial
instruments’.In 2012, the Commission signed "framework contracts" to address coordination of the
implementation of the ecosystem approach between Regional Seas Conventions, to
develop methodological standards for GES and to address emerging pressures and
emerging human activities in the marine environment..

5.1.2.     Pilot
projects on marine litter

Marine litter is a descriptor within the Marine Strategy Directive. To gather information to help
to implement the MSFD requirements on marine litter and further develop the
policy framework, three pilot projects on marine litter were launched in 2011[86]. They aim to study the
feasibility of introducing instruments to prevent littering, the main loopholes
within the packaging material flow, and the plastic recycling cycle and its marine
environmental impact. The projects will be finished by
the end of 2012.

·
Feasibility study on introducing instruments to
prevent littering

This study aims to identify best practices
in preventing and cleaning up plastic litter and assess the feasibility of
different options to prevent littering and increase public awareness, including the use
of economic incentives, and to trigger preventive and remedial action by public
authorities. Such measures should reduce the amount of litter, especially
plastic, reaching the marine environment. Study of the main loopholes within
the packaging material flow

The objective of this study is to identify
the main loopholes in the plastic packaging material flow in the EU and in a
number of countries sharing European seas but with less developed waste
management systems.

The result of the feasibility study will be
a report containing a description of the study, an analysis of different
options, the identification of selection criteria, and final proposals for
measures to close the cycle of plastic packaging material.

·
Plastic recycling cycle and marine environmental
impact — case studies on the plastic cycle and its loopholes in regional European
sea areas.

The objective is to identify loopholes in
the local or regional plastic cycle in the four marine regions of the EU and to
propose measures to fix these loopholes. The result will be a report containing
a description of the four study areas, the monitoring results for marine litter
in each area, an analysis of the sources of the plastics found, and proposals
for measures to address the causes of the marine litter problem. Since marine
litter at the coasts is often monitored by NGOs, it is essential to involve such
NGOs in the pilot project. Based on the analysis, possible measures to address
the loopholes identified in the plastic cycle should be proposed.

A pilot project on ‘marine litter recovery’
recovery' is launched in 2012 with the aim of assisting EU Member States with
environmental actions. The project will assess and develop best practices for collection/recovery
systems for litter including ghost nets from fisheries. This will be tested in
the 4 regional seas of the EU. Although prevention is the best measure, this pilot
project deals with litter already in the marine environment.

The Commission’s proposal for a new
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund included ‘fishing for litter’ as a
possible activity that could be financed.

5.1.3.     Scientific
and technical support for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

In September 2010, ten expert task groups
together with the Joint Research Centre reported on the state of the art
concerning assessment, monitoring and definitions of good environmental status (GES)
and setting of targets. The information was used as input for a Decision
(2010/477/EU) on criteria and methodological standards.

Furthermore, a JRC report reviewed the
existing methodological standards and highlighted the existing gaps and the
need to develop additional scientific understanding to assess GES in a coherent
and holistic manner.

The JRC is co-chairing a technical
sub-group on marine litter and is organising meetings of experts. A report was
delivered in 2011 with technical recommendations for the implementation of MSFD
requirements. The outcomes of the expert meetings in 2012 will also feed into
policy implementation.

Moreover, a report on the evaluation of
concepts and options for effective and targeted monitoring to ensure
consistency and comparability across all European seas was delivered to support
the implementation of Article 9 MSFD.

JRC is continuing to support the MSFD in
2012 by assuring the continuity of ongoing work and preparing the future
structure of the WG GES with support for methodological approaches to
monitoring in order to ensure consistency and comparability across all European
seas.

5.2.        Port
reception facilities

The protection of the marine environment
can be enhanced by reducing discharges of ship-generated waste and cargo
residues into the sea, which account for about 20 % of total discharges at
sea. To meet this challenge, and in accordance with requirements set at
international level (Marpol 73/78 convention), the European Union adopted
Directive 2000/59/EC on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and
cargo residues ‘to reduce the discharges of ship-generated waste and cargo
residues into the sea (…), by improving the availability and use of port
reception facilities’. The Directive provides for specific obligations and
mechanisms to ensure the adequacy of reception facilities, the management and
control of deliveries, and the effective enforcement of its requirements.

After ten years of implementation, the
Commission decided to undertake a formal revision of Directive 2000/59/EC with
a view to further reducing discharges of waste and cargo residues at sea, by
making the system of port reception facilities more effective, more efficient
and more user-friendly.

A broad public consultation was organised
in 2011 and an impact assessment for a possible revision of the Directive is
underway. The Commission will adopt specific proposals in 2013.

5.3.        Marine
Natura 2000 and habitat mapping

The establishment of a marine network of
conservation areas under Natura 2000 contributes to the target of halting the
loss of biodiversity in the EU, taking also into account the lack of scientific
knowledge on the distribution/abundance of species and habitat types. To date
substantial progress has been achieved with Natura 2000 sites covering more
than 200.000 km2 of EU marine waters; however significant gaps still exist,
especially offshore.

In January 2011, the Commission adopted
Guidelines on the Implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives in
Estuaries and Coastal Zones with particular attention to port development and
dredging[87].

The Commission’s LIFE+ financial instrument
for the environment has helped to establish to and manage the Natura 2000
Network at sea, by promoting inter alia innovative techniques for the
protection of the marine environment and through capacity building. Efforts
currently focus on the completion of the establishment of marine Natura 2000
areas and their sustainable management.

A project on ‘Mapping the Essential Habitat
of Marine Species’ was developed by scientists at the European Commission’s
Joint Research Centre (JRC) to identify the habitats of key marine species,
mainly fish of high market value, using satellite-derived data on the sea
surface in order to support fisheries management and control and/or species
protection. The current target species are the Atlantic bluefin tuna, the
European hake and fin whale in the Mediterranean Sea, and the yellowfin and
skipjack tuna species in the tropical Atlantic and Indian Ocean. Only the
habitat models for bluefin tuna and fin whale in the Mediterranean Sea are
currently published. The JRC habitat model enables the creation of near
real-time maps of feeding and spawning potential bluefin habitats in the
Mediterranean Sea, as well as habitat maps over a decade. The novelty of this
model is the use of satellite data on chlorophyll concentrations on the sea
surface, as well as temperatures, to track specific oceanographic features that
play a key role in fish distribution. Feeding habitats are mainly derived from
the simultaneous occurrence of oceanic fronts of temperature and chlorophyll-a
content, while spawning habitats are mostly inferred from the heating of
surface waters. The model performs well in areas where both satellite data and
ABFT observations are available, as 80 % of presence data are closer than
9 km to potential habitats. Overall, the habitat size of ABFT is about 6 %
of the Mediterranean sea surface. The results achieved with the model clearly
highlight that bluefin tuna feeding and spawning are concentrated in some
recurrent locations. This variability is key to evaluating the pertinence of
Marine Protected Areas (or sensitive areas) for this species. The fin whale
potential habitat can be used to estimate the ship strike risk with large
commercial vessels once data on maritime traffic have been integrated.

5.4.        Maritime
safety

The JRC has developed the European Marine
Casualty Information Platform (EMCIP) for the European Maritime Safety Agency
(EMSA). At European level, the purpose of EMCIP is to provide the European
Commission and the Member States with objective, reliable and comparable
information on maritime safety as well as to facilitate cooperation and
analysis in accordance with Regulation (EC) 1406/2002. At national level, EMCIP
facilitates the collection of statistics and any other data analysis needs of
the Member States in the field of marine casualties and helps to meet national
obligations to report investigation findings on certain casualties to the IMO.

5.5.        Atmospheric
pollution from maritime shipping

The 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution
identified that ship emissions of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and
particulate matter significantly contribute to widespread exceedences of
health-based air quality limits across Europe. Without additional action, ship
emissions in EU sea areas would exceed emissions of SOx and NOx from all land
based sources combined in the EU by 2020. Key impacts
relate to human health and acidification and extend beyond the coastal regions.
Pollution from maritime transport is regulated by Annex VI of the Convention
for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78) governed by
the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a United Nation's specialized
agency. On 9 October 2008 the IMO adopted an amendment to MARPOL Annex VI which
will lead to significant reductions of emissions of sulphur oxides from
maritime shipping by reducing the maximum sulphur content of marine fuels from
currently 1.0% to 0.1% in Sulphur Emissions Control Areas (SECAs) such as the
North and the Baltic Sea and from currently 3.5% to 0.5% in non-SECA areas such
as the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. These provisions enter into force in
2015 for SECAs and in 2020 for non SECAs. The later date can be postponed by 5
years pending the result of a fuel availability review to be carried out in
2018. Furthermore, the 2008 amendment sets also limits for emissions of
nitrogen oxides.

Directive 1999/32/EC on the sulphur content of
certain liquid fuels lays down the maximum permitted sulphur content of, inter
alia, marine fuels used in the EU and thus transposes corresponding sulphur
provisions of MARPOL Annex VI. On 15 July 2011 the Commission adopted a
proposal for an amendment of this Directive in order to align it with the 2008
IMO provisions on the sulphur content of marine fuels and to improve
implementation of the Directive by harmonizing and strengthening provisions for
monitoring of compliance and reporting. On 23 May 2012 Council and the European
Parliament reached a provisional agreement on the amendment of Directive
1999/32/EC. The amendment goes further than the provisions of MARPOL Annex VI
as it fixes a date of entry into force of the non-SECA standard in 2020 without
a possibility to postpone it by 5 years. The amendment also foresees a general
cap of 3.5% sulphur content on fuels used by ships in the EU.

In 2010, JRC published the report: ‘Regulating
Air Emissions from Ships: The State of the Art on Methodologies, Technologies
and Policy Options’. This reference report[88]
summarises the main findings of research carried out over several years and
provides a reference framework for analytical tools to regulate air emissions
from ships. It outlines the state of the art with regard to the main
methodological aspects of designing policy measures to regulate air emissions
from maritime transport. These are: identification of impacts; estimation of
emissions; and identification and selection of technological and policy options
to abate air emissions from ships. The overall aim of the report is to provide
analytical tools to help define a policy strategy to regulate air emissions
from ships, by providing various insights into how to design and apply policy-efficient
and equitable instruments.

The project ‘Remote sensing of SO2
emissions from ships’, developed under an Administrative Agreement between the
JRC and DG ENV, has identified and tested remote surveillance methods for
identifying ships that do not comply with regulations on the emission of
sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen in exhaust gas plumes in order to
provide a measurement system that can be employed routinely by regulatory
authorities in the Member States. Through a literature review, a number of
potentially useful measurement methods were selected for further study and
field testing. These techniques were tested in a large field trial, involving
several European research institutions, in and around the port of Rotterdam, as
well as in a smaller trial at the port of Genoa. The so-called ‘sniffing’
method was found to provide the best option for remote surveillance of SO2
emissions and, at the moment, the only option for surveillance of Nox emissions
among the methods tested. However, with further technological development,
optical methods could potentially become attractive alternatives. On the basis
of the work carried out within this project, a detailed description was
provided of the ‘sniffing’ method, its uncertainties and costs, along with a
set of recommendations concerning instrumental set-up, data handling, and
analysis of results.

5.6.        Climate
change

The elevated concentrations of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere have an impact on marine life and coastal communities.
Since the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will continue to
rise even under aggressive carbon dioxide reduction strategies, these trends
are expected to continue for the rest of the century. Moreover, climate change
has to be considered in relation with other relevant stressors on the marine
environment (such as acidification, de-oxygenation or pollution), in order to
implement effective adaptation and mitigation strategies, defined at
appropriate scales.

The main challenge is to develop a
management approach that will maintain performance as far as possible under
uncertain and variable conditions. One of the most effective ways in which the
EU can support adaptation to climate change is through a better observation
infrastructure.

5.6.1.     European
Climate Adaptation Platform

The European Climate Adaptation Platform[89] (CLIMATE-ADAPT), is an online
tool designed to support policy-makers at EU, national, regional and local
levels in the development of climate change adaptation measures and policies.
It helps users to access and share information on:

(1)
Expected climate change in Europe

(2)
Current and future vulnerability of regions and
sectors

(3)
National and transnational adaptation strategies

(4)
Adaptation case studies and potential adaptation
options

(5)
Tools that support adaptation planning

Since it was launched in March 2012, it has
been visited by over 100 000 viewers, which reflects the interest in this
type of knowledge information system for adaptation. The Commission and the EEA
are planning a range of activities to further develop and disseminate this tool
and enhance its content. CLIMATE-ADAPT has two main functions:

(1)
a technical function, to provide relevant data
and information and to gain visual insight on spatial impacts, vulnerability
and adaptation issues

(2)
a policy support function, to guide users easily
and step by step through the development of adaptation strategies and measures,
by means of online support tools, guidance documents, presentation of best
practices and sources of information.

In relation to maritime sectors:

·
CLIMATE-ADAPT has a section on EU Maritime and
Fishery policies as well as one on Coastal Areas

·
CLIMATE-ADAPT contains a database of research
projects, indicators, guidance documents, case studies, maps and adaptation
options related to the marine sector. This database is constantly updated
thanks to the input of users.

·
A Case Study Search Tool allows browsing of
available case studies in Europe, in particular those related to Coastal
Flooding

·
Country pages present all climate change
activities carried out at national level.

·
An online interactive Adaptation Support Tool
guides the user through the policy cycle for the development of adaptation
strategies and measures.

5.6.2.     Adaptation
to the effects of climate change

The adoption of an EU Adaptation Strategy is
planned for spring 2013 and aims to provide a more comprehensive approach to
climate change adaptation in Europe. The main objective is to have a more
resilient Europe at national, regional and local level, in particular by
facilitating the exchange of good practices and coordination in a
cost-effective way, taking due account of the economic, social and
environmental impacts of climate change and climate change adaptation policies.

The objective is also to strengthen the
knowledge base on climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation, as well
as to facilitate its dissemination. Mainstreaming adaptation into policies,
strategies and programmes at EU level (and developing dedicated adaptation
action where needed) will help in building a more resilient Europe. This likewise
holds true for devising effective approaches to deal with the impacts of
climate change, which will frequently have a cross-border dimension ( flooding,
sea-level rise, etc).

Both the public and the private sectors
should contribute to delivering the right instruments, products and services to
increase Europe’s resilience to climate risks. As already outlined in the 2009
White Paper on Adaptation, the Adaptation Strategy is going to be based around
three main objectives:

The knowledge objective is to further the understanding of adaptation, improve and widen
the knowledge base, and enhance access to information on adaptation. All the
information gathered will feed into CLIMATE-ADAPT, the European Climate
Adaptation Platform.

The policy and market objective

The private sector is not yet fully
delivering the right products and services to help private actors increase
their resilience to climate risks. EU-promoted adaptation action can help
capture the potential of the market, market-based instruments and the private
sector in order to strengthen the capacity and preparedness of the EU as a
whole to adapt and respond to climate impacts.

Mainstreaming is another important element
of the Commission’s work on adaptation, with tangible results seen already in
the multi-annual financial framework (MFF), the CAP (Common Agricultural
Policy), TEN-T (Trans-European Network - Transport) and TEN-E (Trans-European
Network – Energy) or Horizon 2020 (the future research support framework). The
Strategy could build on this work, and possibly expand its scope to all
relevant sectors and policy areas.

The facilitation and cooperation
objective

Not all EU Member States, regions or cities
have the same level of knowledge, development or capacity to respond to the
adverse effects of climate change. The Strategy aims to work with and facilitate
cooperation between Member States and stakeholders. It will try to support and
facilitate exchanges between Member States, regions, cities and all other
relevant stakeholders. It will also address cross-border climate impacts and
adaptation measures, and foster regional (cross-border) collaboration.

5.6.3.     Climate
change mitigation

Mitigation measures aim to reduce the
sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions from international maritime transport currently represent around 3 %
of global GHG emissions. This is likely to grow as a result of increasing world
trade and demand for shipping. The GHG emissions of maritime transport have
been recognised as a growing environmental problem. Closely linked to the
development of the world economy, these emissions have increased strongly in
the past few years. Indeed, the CO2 emissions of international shipping to and
from the EU and on intra-EU routes increased by +24 % between 1990 and
2010, and are expected to increase by 87 % by 2050.

In 2011, the Commission set out the goal of
reducing EU GHG emissions from maritime transport by 40% or 50% if feasible by
2050[90].

At international level, on 15 July 2011, Parties to the Annex VI of MARPOL represented in
the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) adopted mandatory measures
to reduce GHG emissions from international shipping. The amendments to MARPOL
Annex VI Regulations for the prevention of air pollution from ships, add a new
chapter 4 to Annex VI on Regulations on energy efficiency for ships to make
mandatory the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), for new ships and existing
ships which have undergone a major conversion, progressively by 1st January
2013. However, as this measure does not address all ship types, existing ships
and operational measures, shipping emissions are expected to continue growing.

The MARPOL Annex VI was also amended on 15
July 2011 to ensure that each ship covered by MARPOL has a Ship Energy
Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) on board. This SEEMP aims to record the
operational measures taken to enhance the energy efficiency of the ship.
However, the measures described in the SEEMP are not mandatory. Therefore, the
impact of SEEMP in terms of CO2 emission reduction remains uncertain.

In the Climate and Energy Package adopted
on 23 April 2009, the Council and the Parliament stressed that: "in the
event that no international agreement which includes international maritime
emissions in its reduction targets through the International Maritime
Organisation has been approved by Member States or no such agreement through
the UNFCCC has been approved by the Community by 31 December 2011, the
Commission should make a proposal to include international maritime emissions
in the Community reduction commitment, with the aim of the proposed act
entering into force by 2013. Such a proposal should minimise any negative
impact on the Community’s competitiveness while taking into account the
potential environmental benefits."[91]

As there has been no such international
agreement leading to emission reductions by end of 2011, the European Commission is considering and
preparing background analysis for possible European
action.

Under the European Climate Change Programme
II (ECCPII), a working group[92]
has been established for formal technical stakeholder consultation. It aims to provide
input to the Commission’s work on developing and assessing options for the
inclusion of international maritime transport in the EU’s GHG reduction
commitment.

5.6.4.     Geological
storage of CO2

Oceans play an important role in carbon
dioxide capture and storage (CCS). In February 2012, a Directive on the
geological storage of CO2[93]
established a legal framework for the environmentally safe geological storage
of CO2 to contribute to the fight against climate change. It covers all CO2
storage in geological formations in the EU, and lays down requirements covering
the entire lifetime of a storage site. Existing legal frameworks are used to
regulate the capture and transport components of CCS.

Under the CCS Directive, the Commission may
give a non-binding opinion on a national draft storage permit — submitted by a
Member State — within four months of receipt. On 28 February 2012 the
Commission adopted its first opinion on the draft permit for the permanent
storage of CO2 offshore on the Dutch continental shelf.

As a first step, storage is expected to be
demonstrated by the Rotterdam Capture and Storage Demonstration (ROAD) project
in the port of Rotterdam, which was awarded EUR 180 million of funding
under the European Energy Programme for Recovery (EEPR). The CO2
from the capture installation would then be transported by pipeline to an
offshore platform for permanent storage, where the CO2 would be injected into
the storage site at a depth of over 3 km[94].

6.           Better
management of maritime affairs

6.1.        Developments
in Member States

In Germany, Guidelines for a
Maritime Development Plan were adopted by the Federal Government in 2009,
serving as a strategic basis for a Maritime Development Plan and Strategy for
an integrated German maritime policy, which was agreed by the government on 20
July 2011. The Plan provides an overview of German maritime activities and
interests, the political priorities within maritime affairs, and ongoing and
planned activities in this field at various levels. It aims to make a strong
contribution to innovation, growth and employment in the maritime sectors and
at the same time to protect the marine resources that provide the necessary
basis for those sectors. A number of German coastal Länder have also
adopted their own maritime strategies. Comprehensive legislation has also been
adopted to ensure the implementation of maritime spatial planning both in
territorial waters (under the control of the Länder) and in the EEZ
(under federal responsibility).

In the Netherlands, a fully-fledged
MSP has been implemented at national level in order to handle the management of
their busy sea areas. Of particular importance for the Netherlands is securing
safe access for maritime transport activities to their ports, such as
Rotterdam.

France
issued an implementing decision in February 2012 to specify the process for
setting up the Conseil national de la mer et des littoraux (CNML), as
provided for in the Grenelle de la Mer legislation, and to define the
geographical limits of the sea basins. The CNML should be launched by the end
of 2012. In March 2012, the Ministry of Ecology (Commissariat Général au
Développement Durable) issued the second progress report on the
implementation of the Grenelle de la Mer.

During 2011, the Government of Ireland
initiated the first steps in developing an Integrated Marine Plan for Ireland.
The ‘Our Ocean Wealth’ public consultation was the first step to promote public
debate on how best to harness the economic potential of Irish seas. A total of
191 submissions were received and there were over 4 000 visits to the
website during the consultation period. The consultation fed into the drafting
of ‘Actions that will deliver an Integrated Marine Plan for Ireland’. The
objective of the actions will be to move from generating only 1.2 % of GDP
from ocean resources to getting the environment right for investment and using
the potential of the marine economy to create jobs in a sustainable manner.

Denmark’s government
issued a national integrated maritime strategy in July 2010, focusing on five
overarching priorities: potential for growth in the maritime industries;
reduced greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution; protection of the marine
environment and the coastal zone; enhanced safety at sea; and coordination of
initiatives in the maritime field. The latter includes increased coordination
between national authorities and the development of maritime spatial planning.

In Cyprus, as a response to the
evolution of the IMP, the government speeded up its efforts and launched a
National Integrated Maritime Strategy on 4 January 2011. It established an
inter-ministerial committee and a National Coordination Team to this end. The
work is coordinated by the Ministry for Communications and Works.

In March 2010, Lithuania established
an inter-ministerial Commission on Integrated Maritime Policy, chaired by the Deputy
Minister of Transport and Communications and assisted by the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Environment. The first task of the
Commission was to verify the content of all existing strategies to ensure that
there are no contradictions and that they are inter-linked.

In 2011, Latvia also established an
inter-ministerial group to deal with IMP. The main objectives of the group are
better coordination of sectoral policies, better information, and data sharing.

Poland has played
a very active role in developing an integrated approach to maritime policy at
national level. The Inter-Ministerial Committee on Maritime Policy is an
advisory body to the Prime Minister, while the Minister of Infrastructure is
responsible for the coordination of maritime policy implementation. Based on
the guidelines for maritime policy until 2020, adopted in 2009, the Inter-Ministerial
Committee has prepared a Maritime Strategy for Poland until 2020. Following
public consultation, the Strategy is expected to be adopted by the Council of
Ministers in autumn 2012. The Strategy sets out the mission of Polish maritime
policy, which is to maximise the all-round benefits for the Polish people from
balanced exploitation of Poland’s coastal location and the natural resources of
the seas and oceans. It addresses the issue of
governance and Poland’s role in the Baltic sea region and international fora,
focusing on maritime regions, human resources and maritime spatial planning. The
Strategy also lists instruments for the implementation of maritime policy.

In June 2009, the Swedish parliament
adopted a national Integrated Maritime Strategy. It calls for sustainable use
of maritime and coastal resources, covering a number of aspects such as
governance, maritime spatial planning, international and regional cooperation,
marine knowledge, fisheries, shipping and protection of the marine environment.
In order to implement the Strategy, a new Agency for Marine and Water
Management was set up on 1 July 2011, replacing the Board of Fisheries and
parts of the Board of Nature Protection. Among other things, the Agency will be
responsible for maritime spatial planning, for which new national legislation
is due to enter into force during 2012.

6.2.        Developments
at EU level

6.2.1.     Joint
Programming Initiative Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans

17 member states and associated countries
(Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, The
Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and United
Kingdom) are involved in the Joint Programming Initiative Healthy and
Productive Seas and Oceans which was officially launched in May 2010[95]. The initiative seeks to
promote synergies between research resources and capacities of countries
involved, with a view to make the most of marine resources and opportunities,
protect the marine environment and adapt to climate change.

6.2.2.     European
Parliament

The EP has from
the very beginning advocated the promotion of an integrated approach to
maritime affairs. This is illustrated by the two positive resolutions of 2007
and 2008 (the so-called Piecyk I and Piecyk II reports), following the
publication of the Green and the Blue Papers. A third EP resolution on the IMP
was adopted on 21 October 2010, confirming the validity of the IMP[96]. The report submitted for
adoption by the plenary was prepared by the rapporteur Ms Gesine Meissner, coordinator in the TRAN Committee,
and includes the amendments made to her draft during the Transport and Tourism
Committee meeting of 28 September 2010. The report was drafted in close coordination
with the Fisheries Committee and the Regional Development Committee as
associated committee (opinions). The Committee voted on the report with 33
votes in favour, 5 against and 3 abstentions.

The resolution was a cross-policy stock-taking
of progress made so far, and contained concrete demands for the Commission to
further develop the IMP. The EP considers that the IMP has the potential to
lead to more coherent policy-making and recommends greater focus on the
maritime dimension of the Europe 2020 Strategy. It calls for adequate funding
and greater transparency. Overall, with this resolution, the EP has
demonstrated that it has a say in the future direction of the IMP, beyond the sectoral
dimensions of maritime affairs. In its resolution, the EP also highlights the
importance of funding for further developing and implementing the IMP. In its opinion
of 19 July 2010 on the motion of the TRAN Committee for the IMP resolution of
21 October 2010, the PECH Committee supported the Commission’s intention to
finance IMP actions over the following three years, building in particular upon
previous projects in the areas of policy governance, sustainability and
surveillance (point 18).

On 9 March 2011, the European Parliament
voted on a motion for a resolution on the Atlantic Strategy. The resolution was
carried by an overwhelmingly majority, with 589 in favour, demonstrating
considerable support for an EU strategy for the Atlantic.

6.2.3.     Council

Since 2007, the General Affairs Council has
adopted cross-policy conclusions on the IMP at least once a year, providing an
overview of recent developments, expressing its endorsement or reservations with
regard to ongoing initiatives, and giving impetus to future development. So
far, the Council has adopted five Conclusions on the Integrated Maritime
Policy, namely under the Portuguese (November 2007), French (December 2008),
Swedish (November 2009), Spanish (June 2010) and Polish (December 2011)
Presidencies[97].
Under the Belgian and Spanish Presidencies, special conclusions on the integration
of maritime surveillance were adopted in 2009 and 2010.

The Council conclusions are addressed in a ‘Friends
of the Presidency’ Working Group, given the horizontal and cross-border remit
of the IMP. Implementation of the policy is also checked against the political
guidance provided by the conclusions.

6.2.4.     Committee
of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions has been very
active on the IMP, providing important input. Its opinion on the Blue Paper,
CoR 22/2008 fin, adopted on 9 April 2008, and the 2009 ‘Maritime and coastal
package’, CoR 416/2008 fin, adopted on 17 June 2009, are examples of how divergent
issues and interests can be linked together in a coherent, complementary and
synergetic fashion. Local and regional authorities, in particular in coastal
regions, are fully involved in the governance of maritime affairs as fully
fledged institutional partners.

In addition to the CoR opinions, significant
work on IMP is being carried out within the CoR’s interregional groups,
including the ‘Baltic Sea Regions’ Group and the ‘Mediterranean’ Group, in line
with the Commission’s objective to support the development of integrated sea
basin strategies taking into account the specificities of each sea basin. They
also work closely with the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR).

The Committee of the Regions adopted an
opinion on the IMP and Marine Knowledge on 27 January 2011[98]. Its key messages are:

·
need for adequate funding within the next
financial perspective;

·
importance of highlighting the regional maritime
strategies;

·
support for Maritime Spatial Planning;

·
need for a clean ship/clean port initiative;

·
importance of the role of all maritime stakeholders
in the development of IMP, especially in initiatives relating to marine
knowledge.

6.2.5.     The
European Economic and Social Committee

Since 2007, the European Economic and
Social Committee has been supportive of the development of an integrated maritime
policy. The most recent opinion of 17 February 2011 supported the overall IMP
objectives[99].
It stressed that the cross-sectoral and cross-border nature of maritime
activities and the synergies between sectoral policies sufficiently justify the
adoption and financing of measures and actions to ensure an integrated maritime
policy.

The Committee adopted an opinion on
maritime surveillance on 29 July 2010[100].
It recommended that advanced security risk management should remain a top
priority for the European maritime domain. It also supported a common EU-wide
surveillance mechanism based upon a harmonised legal framework to cater for the
sharing of sensitive and non-sensitive information among the EU Member State
authorities, agencies and users.

On 26 January 2010, it adopted an opinion
on the sustainable development of coastal areas, focusing on problems related
to the protection of the marine environment, maritime transport (trans-European
transport networks, Motorways of the Sea) and coastal economic activities in
difficulty (requesting targeted action by the European Social Fund, the
European Regional Development Fund and the European Fisheries Fund), tourism,
and climate change[101].

On 11 January 2010, an opinion on the EU’s
maritime transport policy until 2018 called for a more coordinated approach to
maritime careers, involving all relevant stakeholders (maritime
administrations, schools, shipowners’ associations, seafarers’ unions). It also
urged improvements in the standard of training for the maritime professions in
Europe.

6.2.6.     Financing
of the IMP

On 6 December 2011, European Parliament and
Council Regulation No 1255/2011 establishing a Programme to support the further
development of an Integrated Maritime Policy entered into force[102]. Its multiple legal bases
acknowledge the horizontal approach of the IMP. The Regulation provides the IMP
with its first financing programme for actions and projects to be launched in
2012 and 2013. The 40 million euro budget will be spent mainly on supporting
tools to facilitate synergies among sectoral policies, including a knowledge
base for growth and innovation in the ocean economy, integrated maritime
surveillance, and maritime spatial planning. It will also support stakeholder
dialogue, the development of dedicated strategies for different European sea
basins, and the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. The
EU legislators chose to focus on initiatives that can best contribute to growth
and job creation in maritime sectors across Europe, in line with the Europe
2020 strategy.

A Commission Implementing Decision
establishing the IMP Work Programme for 2011 and 2012 was adopted by the
Commission on 12 March 2012[103],
following a positive vote by the Member States in the Examination Committee.
The Work Programme specifies the content, implementation modalities and timing
for the IMP actions, in accordance with the objectives set out in Regulation
1255/2011. The horizontal approach to implementing the Work Programme is demonstrated
by the fact that it is managed jointly by different Commission departments
(Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Environment and Transport) in line with and
complementing activities managed by other departments, e.g. Research (the 7th
Framework Programme for Research and the Joint Programming Initiative ‘Healthy
and productive seas and oceans’) and Regional Policy (INTERREG projects).

The implementation of the Work Programme is
well under way and a number of calls for tender and calls for proposals have
been published following its adoption[104].
Others will follow before the end of 2012. All the available funding will be
committed, as a minimum on a provisional basis, by the end of 2012.

On 2 December 2011, the European Commission proposed a new fund for the EU’s maritime
and fisheries policies for the period 2014-2020: the European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund (EMFF)[105]. The Fund would help to deliver the ambitious objectives of the
reform of the Common Fisheries Policy and to further implement the IMP. The EMFF proposal (Title VI of the proposed Regulation) provides for
the financing of IMP actions that benefit different sectors but cannot be fully
accomplished within individual policy areas, or at Member State level. So far,
operational and exploratory work has been carried out to develop policy
objectives for the IMP and test them in small-scale projects. In the course of the
next financial framework, IMP initiatives should be fully implemented and
completed in order to fully support the growth of the maritime economy. For
instance, the funding up to now has served to develop only a limited part of
EMODNet. The marine knowledge architecture will require more funding to cover
additional data sets and hence reach its full potential to support innovation. Likewise,
a roadmap to exchange information on maritime surveillance, endorsed by Member
States, will be fully implemented through EMFF support.

The maritime pillar of the EMFF would
finance actions that are not already covered by other EU financial instruments
and therefore not eligible for assistance from them. Synergies and
complementarity should be sought with such other EU instruments. In particular,
the EMFF would finance further implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive. This would accompany the funding provided by other instruments, reflecting
Article 22(1) of the Directive, which stipulates that ‘the implementation of
this Directive shall be supported by existing Community financial instruments
in accordance with applicable rules and conditions’[106].

6.2.7.     Coordination
between the Commission and the Member States

Regular political contacts among Member
States and with the Commission are ensured through the High-Level Focal Points
Group, chaired by the Presidency, which provides strategic input to the IMP.
The Group was set up at the initiative of a number of Member States under the
Portuguese Presidency at the end of 2007. The Commission conducts dialogue with
the Member States at technical level in the Commission’s Member State Expert
Group, which meets around 3-4 times per year to exchange information, share
experiences, build common knowledge (notably in the surveillance sub-group) and
work towards the development of specific IMP deliverables. The Group thus
represents a point of reference for sharing information on relevant maritime
initiatives and contributes to the take-up of integrated thinking in the Member
States.

6.3.        Developments
at international level — strengthening global ocean governance

Marine ecosystems and maritime economies
transcend national boundaries. This renders international cooperation on ocean
matters essential. Moreover, open dialogues and exchanges of views are a means
to identify best practices, harmonise positions and more generally promote
global ocean governance.

For the last three years, the implementation
of the Communication from the Commission on ‘Developing the international
dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy of the European Union’[107] has been driven by a
strategy to foster international ocean governance based on the law of the sea.
Global membership of UNCLOS is an EU priority and is promoted through dialogue
with third countries. Key objectives of the strategy are: the protection of
marine biodiversity, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction;
international cooperation in order to reduce and mitigate climate change
impacts; ensuring maritime safety, maritime security and freedom of navigation;
promoting decent working conditions in the maritime sectors; and understanding
the sea better. All these goals have been pursued through the United Nations
and other international fora as well as through other informal processes,
regional cooperation (in particular in shared sea basins) and bilateral
relations.

At global level, the EU
has repeatedly demonstrated leadership, notably pushing for more ambition in
the Resolutions on Oceans and the Law of the Sea and on Sustainable Fisheries (e.g.
to boost the fight against destructive fishing practices and improve the
protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems).

A particular success is
the launching of a process at UN level which should
ultimately lead to the negotiation of an UNCLOS implementing agreement for the
conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond
national jurisdiction. The EU also pushed
for progress in the protection of oceans and seas and in maritime governance at
the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio in June 2012 with an
ambitious ocean agenda.

The UN Regular Process
.for Global Reporting and Assessment of the State of the Marine Environment,
including Socio-economic Aspects is expected to deliyer its first global report
by 2014.

At FAO level, the EU has
actively negotiated new legal tools to combat illegal, unregulated and
unreported (IUU) fishing in the FAO, notably the Port States Agreement. The
latter was ratified by the EU in the second half of 2011. Within the FAO the EU
is also promoting support for developing countries in pushing for the
identification of criteria and a process for the evaluation of flag state
performance.

Bolder external action,
as called for in the Commission Communication on the external dimension of the
CFP[108], is yielding success with stronger
performance by Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and
increasing cooperation with third countries in the EU’s fight against IUU
fishing.

Under the leadership of
the EU, RFMOs are increasingly implementing an eco-system approach to fisheries
management, and putting in place rules to protect vulnerable marine eco-systems
(e.g. NAFO) and marine areas (e.g. CCAMLR). The fight against IUU within RFMOs
is complemented by strong bilateral cooperation. The signing of joint
statements to fight IUU with the US in September 2011 and with Japan in 2012 now
means that the three biggest markets have joined forces in this fight.

Moreover, maritime
affairs have become a regular topic in discussions with the EU’s partners at bilateral
level, such as China, with which the EU has signed a Memorandum of
Understanding on Integrated Maritime Policy, Russia, Japan, Canada and US,
gradually expanding the scope of the sectoral dialogues
into a more overarching cooperation on global maritime affairs, with the focus
on exchanging best practice with regard to cross-cutting tools such as maritime
surveillance, marine knowledge, integrated coastal zone management, marine
technology development, and renewable marine energies. Proposals for framework agreements with third countries
(e.g. Australia, New Zealand) systematically include cooperation on marine
affairs.

6.4.        Improving
socio-economic data for maritime sectors and maritime regions

Since the launch of the Integrated Maritime
Policy for the European Union and the adoption of the ‘The Blue Book[109]’ in 2007, DG ESTAT (Eurostat)
has been providing statistical information to support this policy and this new
approach. The ongoing and planned initiatives in this field are included in the
multi-annual and annual working programmes. In particular, Eurostat has been
regularly disseminating publications on the topic since 2009 and participating
in exchanges with the other Commission DGs.

The Community Statistical Programme
2008-2012[110]
states that: ‘Eurostat will follow the developments in the proposed Maritime
Policy and adapt its programme of work accordingly. New statistical information
will be compiled and launched for guidance of the proposed Maritime Policy
which is currently being drafted by the Commission.’

The Statistical Work Programme of the
Commission for 2012[111],
in the section on maritime policy statistics, includes actions such as maritime
policy data collection using data from available sources in the Commission and
data collected within the European harmonised survey, and the preparation of
statistical publications devoted to coastal regions and maritime sector.

Since 2009, Eurostat has regularly
disseminated statistical information for the EU integrated maritime policy:

2009

·
Statistics
in Focus: Nearly half of the population of EU countries with a sea border is
located in coastal regions: Key figures for coastal regions and sea areas
(Issue number 47/2009 — June 2009)[112]

2010

·
Statistics
in Focus: Portrait of EU
coastal regions — (Issue number 38/2010 – July 2010)[113]

·
Pocketbook:
Chapter 6 Agricultural
statistics: Main results — 2008–09 – October 2010)[114]

·
Regional
yearbook 2010: Chapter 14 — Coastal regions — November 2010[115]

2011

·
Statistics
in focus: The
Mediterranean and Black Sea basins — Issue number 14/2011 – March
2011[116]

·
Statistics
in focus: Maritime service
areas — Issue number 41/2011 – August 2011[117]

·
Regional
yearbook 2011: Chapter 13 — Coastal regions — December 2011[118]

2012
(planned)

·
Regional
yearbook 2012: Chapter 13 — Coastal regions (online article June 2012 paper
version end of 2010)

·
Statistics
in focus: Maritime sector

6.5.        Awareness
and visibility of maritime Europe

The Maritime Forum website[119] became operational in the
summer of 2009 (with a budget of EUR 550 000) as an interactive tool
to develop dialogue with and among maritime stakeholders. The Forum allows
parties interested in EU maritime policy to communicate on a common platform.
They can publish events or documents and follow developments in their areas of
interest. Information can be shared among a closed community or published
openly. Anyone can register on the forum and comment on its content.

The pilot version of the Atlas of the Sea
was launched in May 2010. The European Atlas of the Sea is a support tool for
the IMP. It aims to raise awareness of Europe’s oceans and seas and to
facilitate access to sea-related information. The Atlas is available on DG MARE’s
website[120]
in three languages (EN, DE, FR) with around 70 different maps on geography, nature,
tourism, security and safety, people and employment, transport and energy, governance
and European policies, and fisheries and aquaculture sectors. The atlas will
help increase knowledge of the various dimensions of our maritime Europe, as it
offers a remarkably diverse range of information about Europe’s seas, across
national borders. The atlas responds to the Commission’s drive to improve
communication with citizens. It is an up-to-date, easy-to-use communication
tool enabling a rapid flow of information. It is mainly made up of dynamic
maps, complemented by textual and graphical information. Version 2 is planned
to be released at the end of 2012, with improved performance, maintainability
and interoperability.

The European Maritime Day conferences[121] in Brussels, Rome, Gijón,
Gdansk and Gothenburg have been the key events for the visibility of maritime
Europe. Member States have been supportive of this event, as reflected in
Council conclusions. The event is co-financed by the host country, the host
region and the Commission.

[1]               COM(2007) 575 final of 10.10.2007.

[2]               COM(2009) 540 final of 15.10.2009.

[3]               GAERC Council Conclusions
on Integrated Maritime Policy — Doc. 15175/1/09.

                Integrated Maritime
Policy — Evaluation of progress made and new challenges (2010/2040(INI)).

[4]               COM(2012) 491.

[5]               Council Conclusions on integrated maritime policy,
3022nd General Affairs Council meeting, Luxembourg, 14 June 2010.

[6]               COM(2011) 144 final of 28.3.2011.

[7]               COM(2009) 8 final of 21.1.2009.

[8]               COM(2011) 650 final of 19.10.2011.

[9]               Decision No 661/2010/EU.

[10]             COM(2009) 10 final of 21.1.2009.

[11]             COM(2007) 616 final of 18.10.2007.

[12]             Regulation No 1233/2010 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 15 December 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 663/2009
establishing a programme to aid economic recovery by granting Community
financial assistance to projects in the field of energy.

[13]             TREN/FP7EN/239368 acronym: Waveport (support €4.6
million)

TREN/FP7EN/239533 acronym: Pulse
Stream 1200 (sup. € 8million)

TREN/FP7EN/239376 acronym: Standpoint
(support €5.1 million)

TREN/FP7EN/239496 acronym: Surge
(support €3.0 million)

[14]             COM/2011/0658 final — Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council on guidelines for trans-European energy
infrastructure.

[15]             Decision No 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 6 September 2006 laying down guidelines for trans-European
energy networks.

[16]             OffshoreGrid, Regulatory Framework for Offshore Grids
and Power Markets in Europe: Techno-economic Assessment of Different Design
Options. www.offshoregrid.eu/.

[17]             COM(2010) 677 final. Communication on energy
infrastructure priorities for 2020 and beyond — A blueprint for an integrated
European energy network.

[18]             WINDSPEED. Spatial Deployment of Offshore Wind Energy
in Europe. www.windspeed.eu/.

[19]             SEANERGY 2020. Delivering Offshore Electricity to the
EU: spatial planning of offshore renewable energies and electricity grid
infrastructures in an integrated EU maritime policy. www.seanergy2020.eu/.

[20]             GP WIND. Good practice in reconciling onshore and
offshore wind with environmental objectives. www.project-gpwind.eu/.

[21]             SOWFIA. Streamlining of ocean wave farm impact
assessments. www.sowfia.eu/.

[22]             COM(2003) 717 of 21.11. 2003.

[23]             LeaderSHIP 2015, Defining the Future of the European
Shipbuilding and Repair Industry –Competitiveness through Excellence, COM(2003)
717 of 21.11. 2003.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0717:FIN:en:PDF.

[24]             SEC(2007) 517 — LeaderSHIP 2015 Progress Report

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0220:FIN:en:PDF.

[25]             http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2010\_shipbuilding\_framework/index.html

[26]             http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/ia\_carried\_out/cia\_2011\_en.htm#comp

[27]             2011/C 364/06

[28]             COM/2011/0425 final of 13.7.2011.

[29]             COM(2010) 2020 of 3.3.2010.

[30]             COM(2011) 21 of 26.1.2011.

[31]             COM/2011/0425 final of 13.7.2011.

[32]             COM/2011/0804 final of 2.12.2011.

[33]             http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/111111111/16295.

[34]             COM(2007) 575.

[35]             COM(2008) 791 final of 25.11.2008.

[36]             COM(2010) 771 final of 17.12.2010.

[37]             These studies can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/index\_en.html.

[38]             http://planbothnia.org/.

[39]             https://www.surfgroepen.nl/sites/CMP/maspnose/default.aspx.

[40]             FAO (1994) Corporate Document Repository, ‘integrated
management of coastal zones’, ID 59975.

[41]             For example, the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
introduces holistic water management for inland, transitional and coastal
waters. However, it does not cover sediment management or coastal erosion,
which are among the most dynamic processes in land-water interaction.

[42]             Recommendation (2002/413/EC), OJ 148, 6.6.2002, p. 24.

[43]             The reporting period formally covered by the
Recommendation ended in 2006.

[44]             http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/Final%20Report\_progress.pdf.

[45]             COWI (2011)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/ICZM%20IA%20study\_Final\_report.pdf.

[46]             Council (2009/89/EC), OJ L344 2 2009; http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/barcelona.htm;
the Protocol covers the coastal zone up to the external limits of the
territorial seas of the Parties.

[47]             http://www.acceptance.ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/Report%20Earlyreflection.pdf.
The working group responded to the need identified in the evaluation of the EU
ICZM Recommendation (COM(2007) 308.

[48]             http://ec.europa.eu/ourcoast/download.cfm?fileID=1709.

[49]             http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/ia\_reports.htm.

[50]             http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/Final%20Report\_progress.pdf.

[51]             http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/21807-REL-T006.2\_Final\_Report.pdf.

[52]             http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/impact\_studies/pdf/land\_use\_modelling%20       
adaptation\_activities\_coastal.pdf.

[53]             COWI (2011) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/ICZM%20IA%20study\_Final\_report.pdf.

[54]             72 % fully agree or agree with the statement that
an EU binding legislative framework would provide a better basis for ICZM
implementation in the long term and in cross-border contexts.

[55]             EC (2011). Public Hearing on Integrated Coastal Zone
Management 30 May 2011 — Hearing Report. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/ICZM\_Hearing\_Report\_20110530.pdf.

[56]             This figure is an approximation, as in certain cases an
undefined number of communal authorities are involved.

[57]             At EU level, this is the case for systems or
initiatives such as SafeSeaNet, CleanSeaNet, BlueBelt Eurosur, Marsur and
cooperation efforts between agencies such as EMSA, Frontex, EFCA and Europol.
At national level, a number of centres have been created to bring together the
various existing coastguard functions.

[58]             COM(2010) 584 of 20.10.2010.

[59]             COM(2010) 584final.

Council Conclusions of May 2011
supporting the Commission’s roadmap towards establishing CISE (3092nd
General Affairs Council meeting of 23.5.2011).

[60]             http://www.marsuno.eu/.

[61]             http://www.bluemassmed.net/.

[62]             http://www.marsuno.eu/PageFiles/598/Final%20Report%20111222,tryck.pdf.

[63]             E.g. satellite pictures, seabed
management, drift modelling system, geographic information systems.

[64]             E.g. common training and joint
exercises, exchange of best practices.

[65]             COM(2011) 873 final of 12.12.2011.

[66]             COM(2012) 473 final of 29.8.2012

[67]             FP7-OCEAN-2010, FP7-OCEAN-2011 and FP7-OCEAN 2013

[68]             Directive 2008/56/EC

[69]             SEC(2010) 998.

[70]             2008/56/EC of 17 June 2008.

[71]             Macaronesia consists of five archipelagos: the Azores
(Portugal), Canary Islands (Spain), Cape Verde (Cape Verde), Madeira, including
Porto Santo Island and the Desertas Islands (Portugal), and the Savage Islands
(Portugal), administratively part of the Madeira Autonomous Region.

[72]             Summaries of the meetings and the presentations made at
them are publicly accessible on the EU maritime forum https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/category/161.

[73]             The value of the contract is EUR 45 000.

[74]             Details of the group and summaries of meetings can be
found on the publicly accessible part of the EU maritime forum
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/category/161.

[75]             https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/category/events/161.

[76]             COM(2010) 53 final

http://ec.europa.eu/regional\_policy/sources/docoffic/official/communic/smart\_growth/comm2010\_553\_en.pdf.

[77]             COM(2011) 615 final of 14.3.2012.

[78]             COM(2011) 782 final of 21.11.2011.

[79]             COM(2009) 248 final of 10.6.2009.

[80]             COM(2011) 381 final of 22.6.2011.

[81]             COM(2009) 466 final of 11.9.2009.

[82]             JOIN(2012) 19 final of 26.6.2012.

[83]             Directive 2008/56/EC.

[84]             Decision 2010/477/EU.

[85]             SEC 2011/1255/final of 14.10.2011.

[86]             Specifications can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/calls2011\_en.htm.

[87]             http://ec.europa.eu/transport/maritime/doc/guidance\_doc.pdf.

[88]             http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/111111111/15265.

[89]             http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu.

[90]             COM(2011) 144 final of 28.3.2011

[91]             Recital 2 of the decision n°406/2009/EC and recital 3
of the directive n°2009/29/EC

[92]             WG
6 — Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from ships.

[93]             Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and
amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council
Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and
Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006.

[94]             http://ec.europa.eu/clima/news/articles/news\_2012022901\_en.htm.

[95]             http://www.jpi-oceans.eu/

[96]             Integrated Maritime Policy — Evaluation of progress
made and new challenges (2010/2040(INI)).

[97]             Council Conclusions of 19 November 2007, 8 December
2008, 16 November 2009, 14 June 2010 and 12 December 2011.

[98]             The development of an Integrated Maritime Policy and
Marine Knowledge 2020, CdR 339-2010 of 27 January 2011.

[99]             Opinion 1686/2010 of 17/2/2011 on the ‘Proposal for a
regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a
Programme to support the further development of an Integrated Maritime Policy’.

[100]            Opinion 987/2010 of 29/07/2010 on the integration of
maritime surveillance.

[101]            Opinion 104/2010 of 26/1/2010 on the sustainable
development of coastal areas.

[102]            Regulation (EU) No 1255/2011 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 30 November 2011 establishing a Programme to support the
further development of an Integrated Maritime Policy, OJ L 321 of 5.12.2011, p. 1.

[103]            Commission Implementing Decision C(2012) 1447 final.

[104]            The following calls have been published so far:
MARE/2012/07: Framework contract for support for the implementation of the
integrated maritime policy of the EU; – MARE/2012/08: Project on maritime spatial
planning in the Atlantic, including the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay; MARE/2012/10:
Knowledge base for growth and innovation in the ocean economy: assembly and
dissemination of marine data for seabed mapping; MARE/2012/11: Growth and innovation
in the ocean economy — gaps and priorities in sea basin observation and data; ENV.D.2/FRA/2012/0017:
Framework contract for services related to coordination between the different
marine regions in implementing the ecosystem approach; ENV.D.2/FRA/2012/0019:
Support for the development of methodological standards in relation to good
environmental status of the seas under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive;
ENV.D.2/FRA/2012/0025: Emerging pressures, human activities and measures in the
marine environment (including marine litter). For more details, see the
relevant websites: http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/index\_en.htm
and http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/calls\_en.htm.

[105]            COM/2011/0804 final of 2.12.2011.

[106]            Directive 2008/56/EC of 17.6.2008.

[107]            COM(2009) 536 final.

[108]            COM(2011) 424final.

[109]            COM(2007) 575.

[110]            http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:344:0015:0043:EN:PDF.

[111]            http://cybernews.eurostat.cec/2-manag/stat\_prog/annual\_workprog/asp.cfm.

[112]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-SF-09-047.

[113]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-SF-10-038.

[114]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-ED-10-001.

[115]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-HA-10-001.

[116]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-SF-11-014.

[117]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-SF-11-041.

[118]            http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product\_details/publication?p\_product\_code=KS-HA-11-001.

[119]            https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/.

[120]            http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/atlas/index\_en.htm.

[121]            http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/maritimeday/index\_en.htm.

[Top](#document1)