Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

*|*

# 52012DC0473

**GREEN PAPER Marine Knowledge 2020 from seabed mapping to ocean forecasting /\* COM/2012/0473 final \*/**

  

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1........... Vision. 3

2........... This Green Paper 3

3........... The need for marine
knowledge. 6

3.1........ Industry. 6

3.2........ Public authorities. 7

3.3........ Science. 7

3.4........ Civil Society. 8

4........... Availability and
interoperability. 8

4.1........ Bottlenecks. 8

4.2........ Multiple use of marine
data. 8

4.3........ Competitiveness and
Innovation. 8

5........... Progress so far 9

5.1........ National efforts. 9

5.2........ European Marine
Observation and Data Network (EMODnet) 10

5.3........ GMES Marine Service. 12

5.4........ Data Collection Framework
for fisheries. 12

5.5........ Research. 14

5.6........ Environmental Reporting. 14

5.7........ Climate Change Adaptation. 15

5.8........ International Initiatives. 15

6........... Governance. 16

6.1........ Balance between efforts of
EU and Member States. 16

6.2........ EU support to assembly
and processing of marine data. 16

6.3........ Involvement of Neighbours. 17

6.4........ Selecting priorities. 17

7........... Private Sector
Involvement 18

8........... Responding to Green
Paper 19

GREEN PAPER

Marine
Knowledge 2020

from seabed mapping to ocean forecasting

(Text
with EEA relevance)

1.           Vision

The oceans and seas that surround Europe offer new opportunities to meet the Europe 2020 goals[1]. To realise this potential, we
need to make it easier for companies to invest. We need to lower costs, reduce
risks and stimulate innovation. And we need to ensure that this expansion of
the blue economy is sustainable. The resources are large but not infinite. To
ensure that the expansion of the blue economy happens, that it is sustainable
and that Europe's seas will achieve good environmental status[2] we need to know what the state
of the sea is now, how it was in the past and how it might change in the
future. The Commission aims to work together with Member States to bring
together available resources and mechanisms to deliver that knowledge for the
benefit of industry, public authorities, researchers and society.

This will include a flagship project to prepare
a seamless multi-resolution digital seabed map of European waters by 2020. It
should be of the highest resolution possible, covering topography, geology,
habitats and ecosystems. It should be accompanied by access to timely
observations and information on the present and past physical, chemical and
biological state of the overlying water column, by associated data on human
activities, by their impact on the sea and by oceanographic forecasts. All this
should be easily accessible, interoperable and free of restrictions on use. It
should be nourished by a sustainable process that progressively improves its
fitness for purpose and helps Member States maximise the potential of their
marine observation, sampling and surveying programmes.

While the EU can provide support through the
Common Strategic Framework for structural funding, including the European
Maritime and Fisheries Fund, commitment from Member States and the private
sector is needed to achieve this goal.

2.           This
Green Paper

The Commission’s ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’
Communication of September 2010[3], explained why we need to
unlock the economic potential of Europe’s wealth of marine observations. It
showed this would contribute towards meeting Europe 2020[4] targets on employment,
innovation, education, social inclusion and combatting climate change. It would
provide the knowledge base to facilitate the growth of a sustainable,
job-creating ‘blue economy’ in marine and maritime sectors by improving the
competitiveness and efficiency of industry, public authorities and researchers.
It would stimulate innovation and improve our understanding of the behaviour of
the sea. The Communication then outlined the basic principles for a strategy
that would enable investments in marine observation from Member States and the EU to realise their potential for creating sustainable growth and jobs.

Central to this strategy was the concept of a
European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet[5]), a network of marine
organisations that would provide a single entry point for accessing and
retrieving marine data derived from observations, surveys or samples from the
hundreds of databases maintained on behalf of agencies, public authorities,
research institutions and universities throughout the EU. It would also deliver
digital map layers of parameters derived from these primary data for entire sea
basins around Europe.

But the ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ initiative is
broader than EMODnet. It provides a unifying framework for all ongoing
activities on marine observation within the EU. It embraces the full cycle,
from initial observation through to interpretation, processing and
dissemination. It enshrines basic principles such as ‘collect data once and
use them for many purposes’ and ‘data should be interoperable, accessible
and free of restrictions on use’. These common principles, rules and
standards ensure that Member States’ programmes, as well as other significant
EU efforts can contribute, together with EMODnet, to create a capability much
greater than the sum of its parts. These include the marine service of the
European Earth monitoring programme (GMES)[6], the Data Collection Framework
in fisheries and new pan-European research infrastructures identified by the
European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructures (ESFRI).

Since the adoption of ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’,
there has been good progress. Preparatory actions under the integrated maritime
policy have delivered prototype thematic portals for EMODnet for selected
sea-basins. An interim evaluation[7] based on user feedback has
confirmed the basic soundness of the technological choices and the processes
for assembling disparate data sets. On this basis, a second phase of EMODnet,
financed by the Integrated Maritime Policy Financial Regulation[8],
has begun. This will provide access to a digital map of all European waters by
the end of 2014.

This will show, through a single access point,
the depth of water, as well as the nature of sediments, the whereabouts of
minerals, zones of human activity and the type of habitat. It will be
accompanied by observations of physical, chemical and biological parameters
such as temperature, salinity, acidity, chemical pollution and marine life. It
will be tightly linked to the GMES marine service which will continue to
deliver progressively more refined observations and forecasts of the state of
the ocean.

However, there are a number of new challenges
to be faced:

(1)
major EU initiatives, especially EMODnet and
GMES, have so far been implemented through limited-duration projects that will finish
by 2014.

(2)
the prolonged financial crisis has focused
attention on public spending. There is an even greater need to ensure that some
one and a half billion euro spent annually by EU Member States on Europe’s marine monitoring network is cost-effective.

(3)
easier access to fisheries data has not
happened.

(4)
the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami tragedy in
Japan, followed by the nuclear accident at Fukushima, highlighted the benefits
of bringing near-real time information on the state of the marine environment
into the public domain.

(5)
uncertainty as to the present and future impact
of climate change on Europe’s seas and coasts is stalling local and regional
authorities’ efforts to adapt.

and also new opportunities:

(1)
a study[9]
has shown that private companies collect even more data than public
authorities, but these have not been incorporated within EU initiatives so far.

(2)
what will be provided through EMODnet in 2014 is
an improvement over what exists and will already provide useful services to
public and private bodies. However, it does not stretch the capabilities of
current technology. The digital terrain model of the European seabed will be
delivered at a resolution of about 250 metres; four times better than what was
previously publicly available on a pan-European scale. Surveying instruments
have a precision of centimetres, which would allow the creation and
distribution, at least in some regions, of the much higher resolution product
that users want.

(3)
the 2014-2020 financial framework for the EU
offers an opportunity to develop a more sustainable governance structure in
which the collection, assembly and dissemination of marine data moves from
being a set of projects defined by the Commission to a continuous, integrated
process with priorities based on the needs of users in industry, public
authorities and the research community.

(4)
the rapid expansion of offshore wind power will
transform, stimulate and augment the overall marine economy. Benefits of better
access to marine data calculated on the basis of the 2010 economy will be
underestimates.

(5)
the new Horizon 2020 research programme offers
an opportunity to improve technologies for gathering and processing marine
observations.

(6)
Member States and Associated Countries have agreed to pool resources in a Joint Programming Initiative
‘Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans’ that can provide a framework for
coordination of observation programmes[10].

This Green Paper takes stock of what has been
done. It then opens a debate on the best strategy for moving forward to a new phase
that meets the challenges defined here and profits from the opportunities to
deliver an accessible, sustainable digital mapping of European sea-beds by
2020. It would also provide timely information on the present and past
physical, chemical and biological state of the overlying water column and
forecasts, together with a process that helps Member States maximise the
potential of their marine observation, sampling and surveying programmes.

3.           The
need for marine knowledge

3.1.        Industry

Our seas and oceans can provide the stimulus we
need to get our economies moving. They can provide challenging, rewarding jobs
that meet the expectations of our young people. They can provide the clean
energy we need if we are to avoid a climate catastrophe. They can provide
protein for healthy diets. They can provide pharmaceuticals or enzymes from
organisms that inhabit the greatest
extremes of temperature, light, and pressure encountered by life. And a
growing global hunger for raw materials is increasing the economic attractiveness
of deep-sea mining.

These new opportunities for blue growth and
jobs are being driven by two developments. First, a shortage of available land
and freshwater is encouraging mankind to look again at the 71 % of the
planet covered by saltwater. Second, rapid advances in underwater observation,
remote handling and construction technology, developed primarily in the
petroleum industry, now allow safe operations in deeper waters under a wider
range of oceanographic and meteorological conditions.

In some sectors the growth is already
happening. For instance, wind energy is the fastest growing form of electricity
generation in terms of installed capacity. Already, 10 % of wind
installations are offshore and this proportion is growing. The European Wind
Energy Association reckons that by 2020, 30 % of new construction will be
offshore and 60 % by 2030. Success breeds success. Investments such as
electricity grids for these offshore wind platforms will bring growth to other
industries in their wake.

However, working at this new frontier will
inevitably be costlier and riskier than operating on land if each offshore
facility needs to construct its own ancillary services such as cabling or
supply networks. Or if all are obliged to carry out separate surveys of the sea
bottom, to measure tide and currents, assess marine life that might be
disturbed by their activity and monitor risks from tsunamis, storms or
unfriendly marine life.

For instance, aquaculture operators need
warnings of approaching toxic algal blooms or jellyfish invasions. Mining
companies need to know the topography and geology of the seafloor. Insurance
companies and investors in ports and tourism need data on past extreme events
to estimate the likelihood of future damage and to develop climate-proof
coastal infrastructure. Biotechnology companies looking for new pharmaceuticals
or enzymes to catalyse industrial processes need to know where to look for the
strange life forms that can live without light or withstand extremes of
temperature.

Marine knowledge is needed in the licencing,
design, construction and operation of offshore installations. A leading
licensee of offshore wind energy has argued[11]
that marine data should be a public good, that business could be more
competitive and the cost of generating offshore energy cut if there were
clearer public policies on data ownership, less cost-recovery pricing from
public bodies and common standards across jurisdictions and disciplines.

And, since ‘even an entire society, a
nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners
of the Earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to
bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations’[12], this new marine
economy needs to be sustainable. Offshore operators need marine knowledge to
assess and limit the environmental impact of any proposed activity.

3.2.        Public authorities

Coastal authorities need knowledge of erosion
rates, sediment transport and topography to determine whether protection,
accommodation or retreat is the most appropriate strategy for managing
shorelines. Fisheries authorities need data on past effort and catch
composition to set quotas for the following year. Public health authorities
need to assess whether the sea is safe for bathing and seafood safe for eating.
Civil protection authorities need to be able to calculate where an oil spill
will hit the shore. Coastguards need to know how long survivors of an accident
can survive in the water. Environmental authorities need to assess the environmental
status of their seas and oceans and to ensure they remain safe and clean[13]. The achievement of EU goals
on integrated coastal zone management[14]
and maritime spatial planning[15]
requires knowledge of human activities and sensitive habitats. Maritime
surveillance by radar or sonar is improved with knowledge of sea-surface
conditions, temperature and salinity.

3.3.        Science

Scientific understanding underpins industrial
innovation and environmental protection.

Marine science depends on observations. We cannot
run controlled experiments with two planet Earths. Only by looking back at the
past can we understand what might happen in the future. Gaps left in the record
cannot be filled later. An editorial on this subject in the scientific
periodical ‘Nature’ argued that ‘an accurate and reliable record of what is
going on can trump any particular strategy for trying to understand it’[16].

With these observations, scientists can begin
to reduce uncertainty about the past and present behaviour of processes such as
ocean circulation, ice melting, sea-level rise, carbon uptake, ecosystem shifts
or ocean acidification — all of which have significant impacts on human
well-being and natural ecosystems. Better monitoring of the seas and oceans is
not enough to reduce this uncertainty, but it is certainly necessary. The
Economist[17]
has suggested that governments are not spending enough on satellite
observations.

Reducing uncertainty in the past and present
can improve forecasts for Europe’s climate that are fed into the review and
assessment process of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Wide international participation and careful peer-review ensure that the
Panel’s assessments are the main vehicle for informing government officials
responsible for introducing adaptation measures.

3.4.        Civil Society

Citizens in a democracy need information for
holding their elected representatives to account on issues that affect their
neighbourhood, their livelihoods, their health or the planet Earth that they
wish to bequeath to their children. Experience has shown it is wrong to assume
that the technical background to these issues is best left entirely to the
appropriate responsible authorities. An editorial in Nature[18] used the example of the Fukushima accident to make the case that better public access to data would contribute to
better risk assessment: ‘This would unleash the diverse creativity of
academic researchers, journalists, software geeks and mappers’.

4.           Availability
and interoperability

4.1.        Bottlenecks

The European Commission, in its 2010
Communication ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’[19],
pointed out that bottlenecks were preventing investments in marine data from
delivering their potential benefits. Data were held by hundreds of different
institutions in the EU — hydrographic offices, geological surveys, local
authorities, environmental agencies, research institutes, universities. Finding
out who held the data was a major challenge. Obtaining them could take weeks of
negotiation. And putting them together to provide a complete picture could be a
complex and lengthy process. Many data were typically neither accessible nor
interoperable.

4.2.        Multiple use of marine data

The same marine observations on physical,
chemical and biological parameters can meet the needs of a multitude of
end-users. For example, data on ocean temperature and salinity are used for
assessing ocean climate change, choosing sites for aquaculture or determining
the limits of sonar to detect submarines. Data on seabed substrata are needed
to plan the extraction of aggregates or hydrocarbons, ensure secure foundations
for wind turbine platforms, or assess the impact of fishing. The same data on
marine habitats can be used to assess the impact of a new facility or to report
on the state of the environment.

It is this multiple functioning of underlying
marine data across disciplines and sectors that makes an open access policy the
most efficient option. For such a policy to be efficient and effective, the
data need to be publicly available and interoperable. Commission policy is that
marine data should be relevant, accessible, free of charge and free of
restrictions on use.

4.3.        Competitiveness and Innovation

There is a clear cost to the fragmentation and
inaccessibility of marine data. The impact assessment[20] accompanying the Communication
estimated that existing users would save € 300 million a year if the data
were properly integrated and managed. These estimates do not take into account
inevitable future growth in the marine economy and the consequent increased
demand for data. The first specific objective of ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ is to
reduce costs for industry, public authorities and researchers.

Without better accessibility to marine data,
added-value services such as fish stock assessment or vulnerability of coastal
infrastructure to storm surges can only be provided by the organisations
holding the data. This is inefficient and anti-competitive. Opening up these
resources allows new operators to enter the market. Interoperability allows
small businesses or academics to develop new products and services based on
data from different sources and of different types. The value of this to the EU
economy is hard to estimate, but the impact assessment suggested it could be of
the order of € 200 million per year. The second specific objective of
‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ is to stimulate innovation.

That estimate does not take into account a
rationalisation of present marine observation systems that would reduce
uncertainty in our understanding of the behaviour of the sea. The economic
value of this is even harder to guess, but could be even greater. Indeed,
uncertainty is a principal enemy of those responsible for designing offshore
structures that can withstand the vagaries of the sea, for managing fish stocks
or for designing protected marine areas. It has been estimated[21]20 that a 25 % reduction
in uncertainty in future sea-level rise would save public authorities
responsible for coastal management approximately € 100 million per year.

An optimised, accessible and interoperable
marine observation system that helps scientists reduce uncertainty would be a
major contribution to climate change adaptation. Ocean acidification or changes
in ocean salinity and dissolved oxygen will certainly have an impact on marine
ecosystems and our ability to harvest from them. Earlier information will give
industries such as that for shellfish aquaculture time to adapt. And, although
it is certain that the planet is warming, it is not clear what is going to
happen to local climates in Europe over the next decades[22]. However, it is known that
changes in ocean circulation drive the severity or mildness of Europe’s seasons. With more certainty, forecasts of energy demand or agricultural
production can be improved. Investments in adaption can be made in confidence.
The third specific objective of ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ is to reduce
uncertainty in our understanding of the behaviour of the sea.

These specific objectives were endorsed by the
Council in December 2011[23].

1.           Are there any reasons why there
should be exceptions, other than those related to personal privacy, to the
Commission’s policy of making marine data freely available and interoperable?

5.           Progress
so far

5.1.        National
efforts

Data on the marine environment are a valuable
asset. Long-term trends can only be distinguished from seasonal changes and
decadal-scale natural variation if observations from the past, including those
collected before the advent of digital storage devices, can be compared with
those of the present. If these data are lost they are gone forever.
Observations cannot be repeated.

And they need to be available for use
immediately to prepare for threats such as incoming oil-slicks.

Accordingly, a number of Member States are
setting up national processes for proper stewardship of data that ensures not
only safe archiving, but also cataloguing using standards and technology that
allows fast retrieval of data through automated processes. These national
systems are the foundations of the distributed processes that are being built
up at EU level using INSPIRE[24]-based standards. Examples
include MEDIN in the UK, the French Ifremer-Sextant geoportal, the German
MaNIDA coordination of research data and their MDI-DE initiative for agencies.
Regional initiatives, such as the Spanish Balearic Islands Coastal Observing
and Forecasting System[25],
can also contribute.

2.           How can Member States
ensure that the data they hold are safely stored, available, and interoperable?

5.2.        European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet)

The concept of a European Marine Observation
and Data Network (EMODnet) that would unlock fragmented and hidden marine data
resources was first mooted in the 2006 Green Paper for maritime policy[26]. EMODnet is a network of
organisations supported by the EU’s integrated maritime policy. These
organisations work together to observe the sea, to render the marine data
collected freely available and interoperable, to create seamless data layers
across sea-basins and to distribute the data and data products through the internet

A first set of preparatory actions was launched
in 2009 to set up prototype data platforms. Six thematic assembly groups — for
hydrography, geology, physics, chemistry, biology and physical habitats —
brought together a network of 53 organisations. These were largely public
bodies — hydrographic offices, geological surveys, oceanographic institutes —
that already manage marine data themselves. They were supported by private
companies with expertise in data processing and dissemination.

These groups constructed internet gateways to
data archives managed by Member States and international organisations. They
reinforce and build on ongoing efforts within the Member States such as those
listed in section 5.1. From these six portals, public or private users of
marine data can now not only access the standardised observations themselves,
together with data quality indicators, but also data products such as sediment
or physical habitat maps for entire sea basins. No restrictions have been
imposed on access or use of these data products. The work builds on and
reinforces the INSPIRE Directive[27],
the Environmental Information Directive[28]
and the Directive on the re-use of public sector information[29]. The Common Information
Sharing Environment (CISE)[30]
will be able to import EMODnet data and so provide information to maritime
authorities in environment, fisheries, transport, border control, customs, and
general law enforcement as well as defence.

The work was guided and monitored by an
independent group of experts and an interim evaluation[31] has confirmed the
soundness of the approach. Accordingly, the work is being extended under the
2011 Regulation to support the Integrated Maritime Policy[32] to cover all European sea
basins. A thematic group on human activities will be set up to complement the
other six. By 2014, the aim is to deliver a medium-resolution[33] mapping of European seas for
these seven themes.

The Regulation also supports prototype
‘sea-basin checkpoints’ for the first time. These are mechanisms to identify whether
the present observation infrastructure is the most effective possible and
whether it meets the needs of public or private users. The first two will cover
the North Sea and the Mediterranean.

The Commission proposal for a new European
Maritime and Fisheries Fund[34]
under the 2014-2020 financial framework aims to provide financial support for
EMODnet’s move towards operational capability. With a secure budget, the
Network can move from being a set of finite-duration projects specified by the
Commission to a continuous and sustainable process, with priorities defined by
the needs of industry, public authorities and the research community. Options
for a governance structure for this process are outlined in section 6 of this
paper.

The thematic groups allow the appropriate
experts to define a common structure for all data within each theme. For
instance, biological species observations need at least common descriptions for
the time, place and method of sampling, the name of the species and precision
of measurement. The interim evaluation of EMODnet[35] found the proposed fields for
thematic groups logical, but suggested that consideration be given to merging
the hydrography and geology groups. Nearly all nations have separate
hydrographic agencies and geological surveys with separate missions, but there
is now some overlap. Both are now concerned with environmental protection and
some of the instruments and methods used for surveys are the same. Both
construct knowledge of the seafloor from multibeam echosounder surveys.

3.           Are the seven thematic
groups of the European Marine Observation and Data Network the most
appropriate? Should some be combined? (e.g. geology and hydrography) or should
some be divided?

4.           What should be the balance
in EMODnet between providing access to raw data and developing digital map
layers derived from the raw data across seabasins?

5.3.        GMES Marine Service

The European Earth monitoring programme (GMES)[36]
is a flagship of European Union space policy[37].
The main objective of its marine service is to deliver products and services
that added-value service providers can build on to provide services to public
and private users. The vision is to ensure that products are developed from the
most advanced technology, satellite observations, computational power and
forecasting capability available in Europe.

Under the GMES programme, a marine service has
been progressively developed and implemented by 60 organisations. This
processes and analyses information from in-situ and space measurements to deliver
two classes of information: (1) ocean observations and (2) monitoring and
forecasting.

Ocean models are used to deliver
three-dimensional past, present and future ocean states[38] at a global and European
sea-basin level for different parameters such as sea temperature, currents,
salinity, sea ice, sea level, wind and biogeochemistry. Until now, this marine
service has been funded through the EU’s research budget. As of 2014, GMES will
enter its full operational phase and should be funded through an operational
budget.

In addition to the marine service which has, up
to now, focused on observation and providing near-real time and forecasted
information on the oceans, a GMES climate service is proposed. The simulation
models of the current marine service need to be calibrated and validated
against observations of the past, so the marine service already has the
capacity to store and process these time series of ocean observations. This
investment will be useful for determining changes in ocean characteristics for
the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, as well as providing a valuable
building block of the proposed new climate service.

Standards are being developed so that both the
GMES marine service and EMODnet can access the same in-situ data.

5.           Should a common platform
be set up to deliver products from both GMES and EMODnet?

6.           Should the GMES marine
products and service also be tailored for use by those studying climate change
and environmental protection as well as those needing a near-real-time
operational service?

5.4.        Data Collection Framework for fisheries

Since 2001[39],
the EU has funded the collection and dissemination of data on EU fisheries by
national authorities. Data from surveys, samples and reported catch, effort and
discarding enable the impact on the fish stock to be assessed. Parameters such
as fleet capacity, employment and profitability also enable analysis of the
socio-economic health of fishing communities. The primary purpose is to support
management of the Common Fisheries Policy, though a revision in 2008[40] extended the data to the
aquaculture and processing sector and widened access for scientific or public
awareness purposes.

Article 37 of the Common Fisheries Reform
proposal[41]
goes further. It obliges Member States to collect biological, technical,
environmental and socio-economic data and to cooperate regionally. These
provisions of the Basic Regulation will replace the 2008 Regulation. The
details will be spelled out in a new EU Multi-Annual Programme for 2014-2020.

The Commission proposal for a new European
Maritime and Fisheries Fund[42]
under the 2014-2020 financial framework proposes that the Data Collection
Framework for Fisheries shift from centralised to shared management, so that
Member States take over responsibility for managing funding and monitoring
implementation from the Commission.

In general, fisheries advice requires data from
all countries that fish a particular species or particular area. Once the data
are assembled for a specific purpose, the aggregated data may be published in a
report. However, the raw data provided by the Member States cannot currently be
distributed for other purposes without the consent of those who provided the
data. In practice, this procedure is so cumbersome that it never happens. This
leads to a lack of independent checks, which severely limits confidence in the
results and stifles innovation.

The Commission believes that overcoming issues
of personal and commercial confidentiality is straightforward. It is perfectly
feasible to distribute fisheries information that meets all requirements for
understanding the ecosystem without revealing the activity of individual
vessels. The new Multi-Annual Programme 2014-2020 has been framed accordingly.

Currently, EMODnet does not provide access to
data collected under the Data Collection Framework.

7.           Should data that is
assembled under the Data Collection Framework for a particular purpose such as
a fish stock assessment be available for re-use without the requirement to
obtain authorisation from the original providers of these data?

8.           Should an internet portal
similar to those for EMODnet be set up to provide access to data held by Member
States, as well as data assembled for particular stocks, particular fleet
segments or particular fishing areas? If so, how should it be linked to
EMODnet?

9.           Should control data, such
as that derived from the Vessel Monitoring System that tracks fishing vessels,
be made more available? If so, how can confidentiality concerns be resolved?

5.5.        Research

EU Member States spend approximately € 1.85
billion a year on marine research. About half is on infrastructure for
facilitating observation. This includes ships, underwater observatories,
floating buoys, drifting devices, remotely operated or autonomous underwater
vehicles, all equipped with a range of sensors and analytical capabilities. The
European Strategy Forum for Research Infrastructures (ESFRI) has currently
identified six pan-European infrastructures that will have an essential role
for the European marine research community. The Commission’s 2010 Communication
on an ‘Innovation Union’ proposes that 60 % of infrastructures identified
by ESFRI be launched or constructed by 2015.

The EU’s contribution to marine and maritime
research related actions in the Seventh Framework Programme amounted to € 350 million[43] annually. € 25‑30 million
per year of this is dedicated to marine research infrastructures and research
on marine observation technologies (sensors and systems for marine
observation). The Framework Programme has also supported the SeaDataNet
project, which has been instrumental in harmonising marine data standards and
ensuring interoperability between marine databases. SeaDataNet technology is
fundamental to the EMODnet platform. Other EU projects make observations to improve
our knowledge of the sea.

The Commission’s ‘Horizon 2020’ proposal for a
research and innovation programme in the years 2014-2020 includes a larger
budget and simpler procedures than the outgoing programme. This research
programme can contribute to the ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’ objectives through (1)
support to the development and integration of marine research infrastructures
at EU level, (2) development of user-oriented and cost-effective marine
observation technologies, (3) research projects that will deliver data on the
marine environment and its interactions with human activities, including for
the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

To encourage the development of intellectual
property, ideas developed in EU research programmes become the property of the
researcher. So new sensors or marine observation platforms will not only
support more efficient, effective monitoring of our seas and oceans, but can
also provide the basis for export potential in a high-technology sector with a
global market.

However, ocean observations themselves cannot
be patented and will benefit the economy most if they are made freely
available. At present, many of these observations are not disseminated once the
research project has finished. This is partly because researchers wish to
publish their results before releasing them, but also because there are no
incentives or requirements for them to make the effort.

10.         What should be the focus of
EU support to new marine observation technologies? How can we extend ocean
monitoring and its cost effectiveness? How can the EU strengthen its scientific
and industrial position in this area?

11.         Should there be an
obligation for research projects to include a provision ensuring the archiving
and access to observations collected during the research project?

5.6.        Environmental Reporting

A wide range of data is collected by Member States to implement EU Directives such as the Water Framework Directive, the Bathing
Waters Directive, the Habitats Directive, and, most recently, the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive. Member States also report environmental indicators to
regional sea conventions such as OSPAR, HELCOM, the Barcelona Convention and
the Bucharest Convention. As part of the obligations of the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive, Member States have a legal obligation to report data
underlying initial assessments and stemming from monitoring programmes to the
Commission and the European Environment Agency. The reporting requirements of
the Marine Strategy Framework Directive are the basis of the marine component
of the Water Information System for Europe, WISE-Marine. Under Article 19 of
the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, there is a requirement for Member
States to provide access to data resulting from the assessments and monitoring.
EMODnet will be used to enable this access.

The European Environment Agency has been fully
involved with the development of EMODnet. The prototype portals already built
in the first phase of the project and the more advanced ones being prepared in
the second phase were specifically designed to deliver parameters that can be
used for constructing indicators that will be necessary to assess the state of
the environment under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

The reporting protocols used for different
reporting mechanisms are not necessarily the same, but in the context of the
Marine Strategy Framework Directive, greater convergence is expected. And while
some of the data used to construct the indicators reported to the competent
authority or the Commission are publicly available, many are not.

12.         Should the ‘push’ process
whereby marine environment reports are delivered be progressively replaced by a
‘pull’ process, whereby data are made available through the internet and
harvested by the competent authority using technology developed through
EMODnet?

5.7.        Climate Change Adaptation

To support the development and dissemination of
the knowledge base on adaptation, the Commission launched the European Climate
Adaptation Platform, CLIMATE-ADAPT[44]
in March 2012, a publicly accessible internet site to support policy-makers in
the development of climate change adaptation measures and policies at EU,
national, regional and local levels. CLIMATE-ADAPT features a section on EU
marine and fisheries policies, indicators of climate change and a database of
adaptation case studies, in particular those from OURCOAST[45]. The Commission is developing
a proposal for an EU Adaptation Strategy, to be adopted in 2013.

A more structured approach to marine
observations can deliver more accurate indicators of local changes in climatic
parameters such as sea-level rise and ocean acidification to the CLIMATE-ADAPT
platform and therefore help the adaptation process.

13.         What information on the
behaviour of our seas and coasts can best help business and public authorities
adapt to climate change?

5.8.        International Initiatives

Piecing together a global picture of the marine
world and how it is changing requires observations and data from organisations
outside Europe as well as inside. More structured and open access to European
marine observations and data, as described in this Green Paper, will enable
Europe to provide a practical contribution to international efforts to provide
global coverage such as the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), the Global
Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) and the United Nation process for
global reporting and assessment of the marine environment.

14.         Are any additional measures
required, over and above existing initiatives such as EMODnet and GMES, to
enable Europe to support international initiatives on ocean data such as GOOS
and GEOSS?

6.           Governance

A sustainable marine data infrastructure
requires a process to decide which observations to make, to choose which data
products to create and to provide financial support for the process of
collection, assembly, processing and dissemination.

6.1.        Balance between efforts of EU and Member States

Member States have a legal responsibility to
monitor their own waters and their own fishing fleets. Nevertheless, in some
cases, there are clear advantages in pooling efforts. The obvious example is
observation from Earth-orbiting satellites. It would clearly be inefficient for
each Member State to launch a constellation of satellites to measure ocean colour,
sea-surface temperature, sea-level and ice extent. Indeed, the EU has supported
the development and initial operation of satellites through its GMES programme36. The EU also supports survey and
sampling programmes in fisheries, where it requires the results for its own
purposes.

However, there are other examples where effort
at an EU level might be justified. For instance, reducing uncertainty in the
magnitude and impact of climate change in Europe is impossible without
monitoring the subsurface currents of the Atlantic in areas outside territorial
or jurisdictional waters. Doing so does not benefit the Member State doing the monitoring more than any other Member State. It benefits all European
countries, even landlocked ones.

The Arctic Ocean is another example where the
EU could contribute to ongoing monitoring and mapping programmes to provide
support for those who live and work there.

15.         What criteria should be
used to determine EU financial support of observation programmes other than
those that it already supports? Can you provide examples? Could the Joint
Programming Initiative for European Seas and Oceans play a role?

6.2.        EU
support to assembly and processing of marine data

Up to now, services from each thematic assembly
group in EMODnet have been delivered by consortia through procurement
contracts, with the six consortia selected through separate calls for tender
for each group. In all, 53 different organisations have been involved as
partners in the consortia, with many others contributing. Grants to the GMES
marine service have been awarded following open calls for proposals. Again,
about 60 organisations are involved. The EU budget pays for the delivery of
defined outputs in procurements and contributes towards agreed eligible costs
in grants. The partnerships in both EMODnet and GMES are heterogeneous. They
include research institutes, agencies for meteorology or hydrography and
universities. Some private companies provide software expertise.

The Commission has no influence over the
composition of these partnerships; they are self-selected. The large
partnerships are an indication that the agencies or institutes involved prefer
to be joint owners of a common enterprise rather than suppliers to a single
lead contractor.

The open calls in both cases ensure
transparency and the results in both cases have been very satisfactory.
However, as the initiatives mature, there is a need to ensure the long-term
continuity of operations and infrastructure. Since much of the work in EMODnet
involves the remodelling of national data archives, no partnership without the
participation of the major national marine data centres can be complete. This
might indicate the desirability of moving to a grant or a negotiated procedure
which could be easier if the EMODnet partnerships had a legal status.
Governance issues for the GMES marine service include a legal entity for the
coordination and an appropriate financial mechanism.

16.         How could the governance of
EMODnet and GMES evolve to better accommodate the need for long term
sustainability?

17.         What could be the role of
the Joint Research Centre and the European Environment Agency?

6.3.        Involvement of Neighbours

Europe’s seas do not
only wash the shores of EU Member States. Understanding the ecological health
of the Black Sea or planning a cross-Mediterranean cable requires cooperation
with the neighbouring countries that share these sea-basins. For this reason,
institutes from these countries have taken part in the first phase of the
EMODnet construction. They too are faced with unacceptable levels of
unemployment and they too can benefit from knowledge that will help them
understand how to take advantage of offshore opportunities.

6.4         Selecting priorities

Mapping and monitoring the sea is, for reasons
set out above, essential for sustainable economic growth, environmental
protection and understanding climate change. However, public budgets are
limited and priorities need to be decided. As we shift from a paradigm of
collecting data for specific purposes to collecting them once and using them
for different purposes, two specific questions need answering: (1) what
observation infrastructure and sampling strategy are needed for a particular
sea-basin? and (2) how can the EU’s financial contribution provide the most
added-value?

The Data Collection Framework is satisfactory
on both counts. A process is in place to define what data need to be collected.
Since an objective of the Common Fisheries Policy is to limit the environmental
damage of fishing[46],
the sampling strategy already goes beyond the interest in maximising the fish
yield.

The process to select Earth observation
satellites needed to monitor the oceans is similarly satisfactory. It has been
defined through the GMES process by determining which parameters Earth-orbiting
satellites can actually observe from a height of about 800 kilometres above the
ocean. Technological progress and better scientific understanding enable
progressive improvements in accuracy and the addition of more parameters. For
instance, the operational monitoring of sea-ice thickness will become feasible
with the launch of Sentinel-3. The European Environment Agency is in the
process of identifying what other (non-satellite) measurements are needed to calibrate
and validate GMES forecasting models[47].

For other observations, more needs to be done.
Since shifting currents, migrating species and many economic activities do not
respect national borders, the question on optimum observation and sampling
infrastructure needs to be answered at sea-basin level. Within the integrated
maritime policy regulation[48],
a prototype mechanism has been set up to help Member States hone their
observation and monitoring infrastructure. The ‘sea-basin checkpoints’ for the
North Sea and the Mediterranean will evaluate by 2014 how well the present
monitoring and assembly network meets the needs of private, public and academic
users. They will determine the relative merits of different monitoring systems
— ferryboxes, fixed buoys, floats — measuring the same parameter. All
information sources will be considered; public and private. This information
will help guide Member States in their investments. For instance, should
multibeam surveying of the seabed be accelerated, or is more accurate
information needed on changes in sea-level?

Similar choices need to be made at an EU level.
In the proposed marine knowledge component of the Europe Maritime and Fisheries
Fund, is it more urgent to focus on assembling data on mineral resources or on
marine mammals? Should the EU support surveying or sampling in international
waters? Ultimately, Member States must make these decisions in the framework of
the Council, but they need to have a proper evaluation of the options to guide
them. The answers to these questions will depend on estimated costs and
benefits.

18.         Is a regular process needed
to evaluate the effectiveness of the observation and sampling strategy for each
sea-basin?

19.         What mechanism could be
envisaged to manage the evaluation and assessments needed to inform the
Commission, Member States and Parliament on priorities for EU support?

7.           Private
Sector Involvement

Marine industries will certainly benefit from
the measures outlined in this paper, but there is potential for increasing
these benefits by encouraging the engagement of the private sector.

According to a 2009 study[49], more marine data is collected
by European companies than by the public sector. If a private company collects
data for its own purposes then, in principle, there is no reason for public
authorities to intervene or interfere. European legislation on access and
re-use of these data does not apply.

However, private companies are already obliged
to collect data as part of the impact assessment they have to carry out to obtain
a licence for certain offshore activity. They may also be obliged to continue
monitoring once operations start. In many cases, they are obliged to hand the
data collected over to the licensing authority. However, once the licence has
been granted, there is no apparent competitive disadvantage in releasing these
data into the public domain. The Commission is aware that imposing reporting
obligations on private companies under normal circumstances creates an
administrative burden that is to be avoided. However, replacing a hotchpotch of
different obligations with a single reporting mechanism with common
INSPIRE-based standards could reduce the existing burden. A study has been
launched to help assess costs and benefits.

There may also be a case for extending
reporting obligations once the licence has been granted. The cost of
instrumenting offshore platforms to provide continuous information on the state
of the sea would be an almost negligible increase in the overall costs of the
installation. The idea would be to collect data from all EU platforms as well
as other observing platforms and make them publicly available. This could well
cost less than the potential benefit to the whole offshore industry of
obtaining better knowledge of potential threats such as rogue waves[50], poisonous algae or
radioactive leaks Improving the competitiveness of offshore business has been a
prime motivation for ‘Marine Knowledge 2020’. A public-private partnership
whereby private companies share the expenses of running the European Marine
Observation and Data Network in return for a say in the setting of priorities
could accelerate this process.

20.         Under what circumstances
should data provided by private companies for licencing purposes be made
publicly available?

21.         Should licenced offshore
private sector actors be obliged to contribute to wider monitoring of the sea
where this is feasible?

22.         What public-private
partnership models can maximise incentives for industry to share data and
investments in data as well as benefits to all stakeholders?

8.           Responding
to Green Paper

This Green Paper opens a debate on the best
strategy for moving forward to accessible, sustainable digital mapping of
European seabeds, as well as timely information on the present and past
physical, chemical and biological state of the overlying water column and
forecasts for the future, together with a process that helps Member States
maximise the potential of their marine observation, sampling and surveying
programmes.

The Commission has set up a website for
responses.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs\_fisheries/consultations/marine-knowledge-2020/index\_en.htm

This website will be open till 15 December
2012. Responses can be sent either in an official capacity or individually. The
outcome of the consultation will be published on the website of the
Commission’s Directorate General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. The
affiliation and name of individual contributors replying in a personal capacity
will not be published unless specifically authorised.

[1]               Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and
inclusive growth Brussels, 3.3.2010 COM(2010) 2020

[2]               As required under the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive (2008/56/EC) by 2020.

[3]               Marine Knowledge 2020: marine data and observation
for smart and sustainable growth, 8.9.2010 COM(2010) 461.

[4]               See footnote 1

[5]               In this Green Paper we will endeavour to limit the
use of acronyms but please indulge us in this one which will recur throughout
the text.

[6]               Commission Communication on the European Earth
monitoring programme (GMES), 30.11.2011, COM(2011) 831 final.

[7]               Annexed to this Green Paper.

[8]               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.

[9]               Marine Data Infrastructure, Final Report submitted to
DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, November 2009.

[10]             Commission Recommendation of 16 September 2011 on the
research Joint Programming Initiative ‘Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans’ (2011/C 276/01).

[11]             Twelfth
meeting of Marine Observation and Data Expert Group, 10 March 2011
https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/node/1709.

[12]             Karl Marx, Capital Vol. III Part VI Transformation of
Surplus-Profit into Ground-Rent.

[13]             Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in
the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)
.

[14]             Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 30 May 2002 concerning the implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone
Management in Europe OJ L 148, 6.6.2002, p. 24–27.

[15]             Maritime Spatial Planning in the EU — achievements and
future development, COM/2010/0771 final .

[16]             Editorial
Nature 450, 761 (6 December 2007).

[17]             Editorial Economist ‘Something to watch over us’. 12
May, 2012.

[18]             ‘A little knowledge’, Nature 472, 135 (14 April 2011).

[19]             See footnote 3.

[20]             European Marine Observation and Data Network Impact
Assessment, 8.9.2010, SEC(2010) 998 .

[21]             See footnote 20

[22]             The real holes in climate science Nature Vol 463, 21
January 2010FEATURE.

[23]             3139th Environment Council meeting Brussels, 19
December 2011.

[24]             Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial
Information in the European Community (INSPIRE).

[25]             This is not an exhaustive list of national endeavours.

[26]             Green Paper ‘Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas’, 7.6.2006 COM(2006) 275.

[27]             See footnote 24

[28]             DIRECTIVE 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information

[29]             Directive
2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on
the re-use of public sector information

[30]             Communication on a Draft Roadmap towards establishing
the Common Information Sharing Environment for the surveillance of the EU
maritime domain, 20.10.2010 COM/2010/0584

[31]             See footnote 7

[32]             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 (.

[33]             For instance one eighth of a minute longitude and
latitude for digital terrain model and 1:250 000 for seabed sediments.

[34]             Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament
and of the Council on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund , 2.12.2011,
COM(2011) 804 final.

[35]             See footnote 7

[36]             See footnote 6

[37]             Communication ‘Towards a Space Strategy for the
European Union that benefits its citizens’ 4.4.2011
COM(2011) 152 .

[38]             Effectively the oceanographic equivalent of a weather
forecast.

[39]             Council Regulation (EC) No 1543/2000 of 29 June 2000
establishing a Community framework for the collection and management of the
data needed to conduct the common fisheries policy.

[40]             Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008of 25 February 2008
concerning the establishment of a Community framework for the collection,
management and useof data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific
advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy.

[41]             Proposal for a Regulation on the Common Fisheries
Policy [repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 199/2008] COM(2011) 425.

[42]             Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament
and of the Council on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund , 2.12.2011,
COM(2011) 804 final.

[43]             out of a total of € 5.4 billion on average.

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

[45]             http://ec.europa.eu/ourcoast/.

[46]             Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December
2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources
under the Common Fisheries Policy .

[47]             through the Seventh Framework Programme project GISC
(GMES in-situ coordination).

[48]             See footnote 8

[49]             Marine Data Infrastructure, Final Report submitted to
DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, November 2009.

[50]             also known as freak waves, monster waves, killer waves,
extreme waves or abnormal waves.

[Top](#document1)