ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
|
Интеллектуальная Система Тематического Исследования НАукометрических данных |
||
In the last few years in the European countries of the EC the onset for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) has been given which has to result in a description and plan for reaching Good Environmental Status (GES) of the European marine water bodies by 2020. In a survey for 20 different European countries, the actual status and developments on Descriptor 1 of the MSFD (Biodiversity) or in related directives and legislation were determined by compiling and analyzing the documentation available for each country. Criteria for the analysis were the ecological relevance of a proposed biodiversity indicator as being realistically representing biodiversity, and level of implementation of an indicator as being still under discussion or already in operation. For the evaluation of the relevance of being a proper biodiversity indicator a value of 1 to 5 was given per indicator proposed by each country. Similarly, for the degree of implementation, i.e. the operationability, also a value of 1 to 5 was given. Marked differences were found between countries in the description and in the development of the indicators for marine biodiversity as well as in the degree of implementation. Although the MSFD descriptor for biodiversity seemed to be worked out rather exhaustively (itemized with many indicators) in many countries, at more detailed observation it became clear that most indicators are general statements and not fixed parameters nor specific species, as was often usual too in other official systems and classifications as the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The conclusion from the available documentation was that no consistent and harmonized approach for describing marine biodiversity with concrete indicators at a pan-European level can be found. Most European countries are not well prepared to introduce the MSFD and most descriptors are not properly bottom-up science driven, nor well-described, biodiversity indicators. The best prepared countries were UK and Latvia, the worst the Netherlands. The first two countries had involved many scientists in a bottom-up process to select relevant biodiversity indicators, the latter country used a top-down (political driven) approach resulting in hardly any relevant indicator for biodiversity at all. A couple of countries outside the EC, as Turkey and Russia, showed a remarkable tendency for implementing a similar system as the MSFD in a more advanced way than their EC counterparts.