Population status of marine fish

OSPAR directly or indirectly assessed the population status of 316 marine fish across coastal, demersal, pelagic and deep-sea groups. This assessment was conducted by integrating commercially exploited marine fish stocks and sensitive species of conservation concern. None of the fish groups in any of the regions assessed was found to be in good environmental status. Arctic Waters (Region I) and Wider Atlantic (Region V) were not assessed. In addition, the status of fish listed by OSPAR as threatened and/or declining was assessed where possible; with some exceptions, these were found to have remained in poor status. Many of the fish are of unknown status. This refers to stocks for which assessments were attempted but for which definitive results were not available. Further work is required to improve the assessment of these stocks.

Confidence Assessment:

OSPAR acts as a coordination platform in the North-East Atlantic for the regional implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) that aims to achieve a Good Environmental Status (GES) in European marine environments, as well as for the coordination of other national frameworks. The characteristics of GES are determined by the individual EU member states, based on criteria elements, threshold values and methodological standards set regionally or at EU level.
Norwegian, Icelandic, United Kingdom, Greenlandic and Faroese marine areas are not covered by the MSFD.

The overall status of fish was assessed by integrating the OSPAR common indicator for the recovery of sensitive fish species with third-party assessments of commercial fish stocks produced by ICES and ICCAT. Results were obtained for Greater North Sea (Table S.1), Celtic Seas (Table S.2) and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Table S.3) and presented for the species groups of coastal fish, demersal shelf fish and pelagic shelf fish. For the deep-sea fish species group, results were expressed for the OSPAR Maritime Area (Table S.4). Good environmental status was not achieved in any of the Regions, nor for any of the fish species groups (Figure S.1). 

The integration method is described in the CEMP Guideline for fish thematic assessment. The overall status of fish in each species group was assessed with reference to a threshold which 80% of assessed items (defined as stocks and/or species) were required to achieve in order for the species group to be considered in good status. This includes those items for which status was unknown.

Figure S.1: Schematic representation of good environmental status of fish by species group and spatial assessment unit, based on the integrated fish assessment. Norwegian, Icelandic and United Kingdom marine areas are not covered by the MSFD

The integrated assessment of fish covered 316 items, including 127 sensitive species (from Common Indicator FC1 ) and 189 commercial stocks from third-party assessments conducted by ICES and ICCAT, details of which can be found in the CEMP Guideline. 

In the Greater North Sea area, 119 items were assessed comprising 37 sensitive species and 82 commercial stocks (Table S.1). In Celtic Seas, 121 items were assessed comprising 38 sensitive species and 83 commercial stocks (Table S.3). In Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, 91 items were assessed comprising 36 sensitive species and 55 commercial stocks (Table S.3). The 36 items assessed for deep-sea fish across the OSPAR Maritime Area (Table S.4) consisted of 12 sensitive species and 24 commercial stocks.

Figure S.2. Proportion of fish having achieved or failed the threshold for each species group and spatial assessment unit. To achieve good environmental status for the integrated status assessment of fish species groups, 80% of the items per group must have achieved their threshold. Assessment reference period 2015-2020.

Coastal fish:

Coastal fish are defined as fish which spend most of their life cycles in coastal or transitional waters, but they also include diadromous fish (e.g., Atlantic salmon, which straddles marine and fresh waters), whose movements may be much wider.

In the Greater North Sea, 13 coastal fish were assessed including nine sensitive species and four commercial stocks. Of these, one achieved the indicator threshold, eight failed the threshold and four were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited coastal fish stocks, none achieved the indicator threshold, indicating that none are being harvested at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive coastal fish species, one achieved the indicator threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place. Overall, for coastal fish in the Greater North Sea, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Celtic Seas, 13 coastal fish were assessed including 10 sensitive species and three commercial stocks. Of these coastal fish, none achieved the threshold, five failed the threshold and eight were unknown (Figure S.2).  Of the commercially exploited coastal fish stocks, none achieved the threshold, indicating that none are being harvested at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive coastal fish species, none achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery is taking place in none of the species. Overall, for coastal fish in the Celtic Seas, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, nine items were assessed including six sensitive species and six commercial stocks. Of these, three achieved the threshold, three failed the threshold and three were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited coastal fish stocks, none achieved the threshold, indicating that none is being harvested at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive coastal fish species, three achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place for these three species. Overall, for coastal fish in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, good environmental status was not achieved. 

The assessments of coastal fish covered items for which assesments were available. The assessments may thus not be representative of all coastal fish in the areas assessed. It should be noted that diadromous species (shads, lampreys, salmonids and European eel) are considered under coastal fish.

Deep-sea fish:

In the OSPAR Maritime Area, 36 deep-sea fish were assessed including 12 sensitive species and 24 commercial stocks. Of these, four achieved the threshold, 10 failed the threshold and 22 were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited deep-sea fish stocks, one achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive deep-sea fish species, three achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place for these species. Overall, for deep-sea fish in the OSPAR Maritime Area, good environmental status was not achieved.

The assessments of deep-sea fish covered items for which assesments were already available, and areas where there were enough data to use the common indicator. The assessments may thus not be representative of deep-sea fish in the OSPAR Maritime Area.

Pelagic shelf fish:

In the Greater North Sea, 20 pelagic shelf fish were assessed including two sensitive species and 18 commercial stocks. Of these, eight achieved the threshold, five failed the threshold, and seven were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited pelagic fish stocks, seven achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive pelagic fish species, one achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place for that species. Overall, for pelagic shelf fish in the Greater North Sea, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Celtic Seas, 20 pelagic shelf fish were assessed including two sensitive species and 18 commercial stocks. Of these, five achieved the threshold, four failed the threshold, and 11 were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited pelagic fish stocks, five achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive pelagic shelf fish species, none achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was not taking place for any of these species. Overall, for pelagic shelf fish in the Celtic Seas, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, 20 pelagic shelf fish were assessed including three sensitive species and 17 commercial stocks. Of these, seven fish achieved the threshold, five failed the threshold and eight were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited pelagic fish stocks, six achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive pelagic fish species, one achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place for that species. Overall, for pelagic shelf fish in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, good environmental status was not achieved.

Demersal shelf fish:

In the Greater North Sea, 86 demersal shelf fish were assessed including 26 sensitive species and 60 commercial stocks. Of these, 25 fish achieved the threshold, 26 failed the threshold and 35 were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited demersal fish stocks, 13 achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive demersal fish species, 12 achieved the threshold, indicating that long term recovery was taking place for these species. Overall, for demersal shelf fish in the Greater North Sea, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Celtic Seas, 88 demersal shelf fish were assessed including 26 sensitive species and 62 commercial stocks. Of these, 23 achieved the threshold, 29 failed the threshold and 36 were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited demersal fish stocks, 10 achieved the threshold, indicating harvesting at levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at the biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive demersal fish species, 13 achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place for those species. Overall, for demersal shelf fish in the Celtic Seas, good environmental status was not achieved.

In the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, 62 demersal shelf fish were assessed including 27 sensitive species and 35 commercial stocks. Of these, 22 achieved the threshold, 12 failed the threshold and 28 were unknown (Figure S.2). Of the commercially exploited demersal fish stocks, eight achieved the threshold, indicating levels of mortality which can produce maximum sustainable yield and at biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield. Of the sensitive demersal fish species, 14 achieved the threshold, indicating that recovery was taking place. Overall, for demersal shelf fish in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, good environmental status was not achieved.

Table S.1: Results of the integrated assessment for fish in the Greater North Sea Region. Assessment reference period 2015-2020

Table S.2:  Results of the integrated assessment for fish in the Celtic Seas Region. Assessment reference period 2015-2020

Table S.3: Results of the integrated assessment for fish in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast Region. Assessment reference period 2015-2020

Table S.4: Results of integrated assessment for deep-sea fish in the OSPAR Maritime Area. Assessment reference period 2015-2020

Assessment of fish in the Norwegian waters of OSPAR Arctic Waters (Region I)

In the Norwegian waters of OSPAR Arctic Waters (Region I), the state of commercial fish stocks was based on stock status for the reference year 2020 under the ICES fisheries overview for the Norwegian and Barents Seas (ICES, 2021a, b). A stock was judged to be in good status if it received a green infographic in column 11 of Table A.1 of the relevant ICES fisheries overview (ICES, 2022), referring to stock size in relation to reference point. It should be noted that this definition is not the same as that used in the integrated fish assessment for other regions. Other, non-assessed stocks were taken from Table A.2 of the fisheries overviews (Stocks of unknown status) (ICES, 2022). The threshold is based on the reference level of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) or, if that is not possible to estimate, Precautionary Approach (PA). Table S.5 shows the results by stock and by species group. A total of 23 stocks were assessed. In 2020, eight (35%) achieved the threshold, seven (30%) did not achieve the threshold and eight (35%) were unknown with respect to threshold.

Coastal fish:

Among the coastal fish in the Norwegian waters of OSPAR Region I, two stocks were assessed. Neither Southern Norwegian coastal cod, nor Northern Norwegian coastal cod, were in good status.

Deep-sea fish:

Among deep-sea fish, five stocks were assessed. One stock, Greenland halibut (sub-areas 1 and 2), was in good status. Three were of unknown status. These were the greater silver smelt (sub-areas 1, 2 and 4 and division 3.a), tusk (sub-areas 1 and 2) and the roundnose grenadier (sub-areas 1, 2, 4, 8 and 9, division 14.a, and sub-divisions 14.b.2 and 5.a.2). One was not in good status: blue ling (sub-areas 1, 2, 8, 9 and 12 and divisions 3.a and 4.a).

Pelagic fish:

Among pelagic fish in the Norwegian waters of OSPAR Region I, seven stocks were assessed. Three were in good status: Norwegian spring spawning herring (sub-areas 1, 2, 5 and divisions 4.a and 14.a), mackerel (sub-areas 1–8 and 14 and division 9.a) and blue whiting (sub-areas 1–9, 12 and 14). Two were not in good status: horse mackerel (sub-area 8 and divisions 2.a, 4.a, 5.b, 6.a, 7.a –c, and e-k) and capelin (sub-areas 1 and 2 excluding division 2.a west of 5A°W). Two stocks were of unknown status: porbeagle (North-East Atlantic) and basking shark (North-East Atlantic).

Demersal shelf fish:

Among demersal fish in the Norwegian waters of OSPAR Region I, nine stocks were assessed. Four were in good status: cod, haddock, beaked redfish and saithe (all in sub-areas 1 and 2). Two were not in good status: golden redfish (sub-areas 1 and 2) and spurdog (North-East Atlantic). Three stocks were unknown: ling (sub-areas 1 and 2), greater forkbeard (North-East Atlantic) and starry ray (sub-areas 2 and 4 and division 3.a).

Table S.5: Norwegian waters of OSPAR Arctic Waters (Region I). Status of commercial stocks for reference year 2020. The threshold is based on the reference level of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) or, if that is not possible to estimate, Precautionary Approach (PA)

Threatened and/or declining fish in the OSPAR Maritime Area

A summary of threatened and/or declining fish species recently assessed under the OSPAR protected species and habitats (POSH) process is provided below. However, this does not include blue fin tuna, orange roughy, cod or two species of seahorses which are on the OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species but have not yet been assessed. 

Six taxa (thornback ray, spotted ray, European eel, common skate complex, Alosa spp. and sea lamprey) are also assessed by the OSPAR Common Indicator ‘Recovery of sensitive fish species’, which uses different methods from the status assessments for listed species. In general, there is good agreement between the assessments where additional information is provided by the common indicator for some species, although some differences are noted for the allis shad. Seahorses were not assessed in the common indicators, nor were they included in the thematic assessment integration due to concerns about the data quality for these cryptic species in some areas. However, indicative common indicator metric results are provided below.

Coastal fish:

There exists an OSPAR assessment of one threatened and declining coastal species, the European sturgeon. Its status is highly critical, however, and its increased abundance in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Regions II, III, IV) has been due to restocking programes. Full details of this assessment can be found in the OSPAR Overview assessment of implementation reporting and a summary is provided in Table S.6.

For comparative purposes, the OSPAR assessments of threatened and declining diadromous species (allis shad, sea lamprey, Atlantic salmon and European eel) are also considered under coastal fish.

The status of Atlantic salmon is still poor in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Regions II, III, IV). Its range of distribution has remained stable for the past decade, but abundance and condition are decreasing in some areas. While historical key threats were increasingly affecting populations in the past, many efforts to alleviate their effects have been undertaken and the situation is mostly stable or improving, but other threats are emerging and expanding. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2022 - Atlantic salmon .

The status of the European eel is still very poor in all OSPAR Regions where the species occurs, with glass eel recruitment, although stable since 2010, remaining at a very low level and no clear sign of an upturn. While the pressure of commercial fishing on the stock appears to be decreasing in the current assessment period (2010-2021), other pressures (dams, turbines, habitat loss, pollution, poaching, diseases and pathogens, climate change, etc.) still pose a significant threat to the species. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2022 – European eel . The ‘ Recovery of sensitive fish species ’ Common Indicator assessment for the European eel gives an unknown result for Celtic Seas, Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, and Wider Atlantic (Regions III, IV, V). However, the metric indicates a long-term decline with stable state (i.e., no further decline) in the short term for the Greater North Sea (Region II).

The status of the allis shad is very poor in the OSPAR Maritime Area. Currently the most successful spawning rivers are located in France and Portugal, but in both cases these populations are threatened. Portugal is a stronghold for this species, particularly in the central and northern Mondego, Vouga and Minho river basins, where large populations still exist. There was a very abundant and well documented population in the Gironde Basin (south-west France), but since 2000 both juvenile and adult abundance has declined dramatically. During this current assessment period (2009-2021), threats to this species are becoming more significant, mainly due to the construction of dams, fishing in estuaries (e.g., the Gironde) or by-catch at sea. There is also growing concern about new threats (i.e., invasive species, climate change and predation). Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Overview assessment of implementation reporting and a summary is provided in Table S.7. The ‘ Recovery of sensitive fish species ’ Common Indicator assesses the Alosa spp. in the offshore area only, and results are in general agreement with the status assessment for the Allis shad, indicating that the long-term target of recovery was not achieved in the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas (Regions II, III). However, the common indicator metric finds the Alosa spp. to be recovering in the offshore area of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Region IV), with additional signs of short-term recovery in the Greater North Sea (Region II).

The status of sea lamprey is still poor in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Regions I-IV). Physical obstacles to species migration and freshwater habitat loss are the key pressures for the assessed sea lamprey breeding populations. Dams, habitat loss and pollution, still pose a significant threat to the species. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2022 – Allis shad . The ‘ Recovery of sensitive fish species ’ Common Indicator also assessed sea lamprey, with an unknown metric result for the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Region IV) and a stable outcome for the Greater North Sea (Region II).

Table S.7: Summary of status assessments of OSPAR listed diadromous fish

Legend:

Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)
↓       decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
↑       increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
↔     no change observed in the criterion assessed
?       trend unknown in the criterion assessed

Two OSPAR listed seahorse species are yet to be assessed, and the indicative results for Hippocampus spp. using the ‘Recovery of sensitive fish species’ Common Indicator method are not included due to data quality concerns. The preliminary common indicator metric results indicate unknown status in the Celtic Seas (Region III), a stable outcome in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Region IV) and recovery in the Greater North Sea (Region II). However, these results should be treated with caution due to concerns relating to the efficiency of trawl surveys in capturing and identifying these cryptic species and a lack of occurrences in reference periods, particularly in stronghold areas (i.e., English Channel surveys).

Deep-sea fish:

There are OSPAR assessments of three threatened and/or declining deep-sea fish: gulper shark, leafscale gulper shark and Portuguese dogfish. For gulper shark, fishing pressure, identified as its only threat in the last OSPAR assessment, has declined thanks to regulations adopted within and beyond national waters. However, the available data are insufficient to evaluate the current status of the population, and the species is known to exhibit life-history traits that make the recovery process slow. For both leafscale gulper shark and Portuguese dogfish, all the pressures identified in the last OSPAR assessment have declined, several fisheries regulations having been adopted within and beyond national waters. It is not possible to evaluate the current status of either species, though they are known to exhibit life-history traits that make the recovery process slow. Full details of these assessments can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Gulper shark , OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Leafscale gulper shark and OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Portuguese dogfish and a summary is provided in Table S.8.

Table S.8: Summary of status assessments of OSPAR listed deep-sea fish

Legend:

Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)
↓       decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
↑       increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
↔     no change observed in the criterion assessed
?       trend unknown in the criterion assessed

Pelagic shelf fish:

There are OSPAR assessments of two threatened and/or declining pelagic fish: basking shark and porbeagle. For basking shark, there is no evidence to suggest that its current status has changed as compared with the previous assessment, and its current population status is still unknown. Management and conservation measures have been developed, but international coordination of measures is still needed. Further details can be found in the OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Basking shark . Porbeagle is a prohibited species for commercial fishing under EU fishing regulations. The most recent ICES assessment in 2019 considers the status of its stocks to be unknown. The species’ moderate intrinsic population growth rate qualified the porbeagle to be on the OSPAR List in 2008, since this rate allows only a slow recovery from depletion. This sensitivity to exploitation remains. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 - Porbeagle and a summary is provided in Table S.9.

Table S.9. Summary of status assessments of OSPAR listed pelagic fish

Legend:

Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)
↓       decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
↑       increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
↔     no change observed in the criterion assessed
?       trend unknown in the criterion assessed

There are OSPAR assessments of five threatened and declining demersal shelf fish: spurdog, angel shark, common skate complex, spotted ray and thornback ray. Of these species, improved status is evidenced for spurdog, spotted ray and thornback ray.

Spurdog is a prohibited species for commercial fishing in EU, United Kingdom and Norwegian waters, with some exceptions for unavoidable by-catch. There are indications that its status is improving, and its recruitment appears to have improved over the last ten years. However, the stock of this species remains low compared with historical levels. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Spurdog .

The angel shark remains a rare species that declined severely in the OSPAR Maritime Area and adjacent waters (e.g., the Mediterranean Sea) during the 20th century; it was lost from large parts of the OSPAR Area from the 1960s to the 1990s. Its low productivity and limited movements mean that any perceptible improvement in status would only occur over a decadal timeframe. This is still the case in the current assessment and, while there is no evidence of further deterioration, neither is there any sign of improving status. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Angel shark .

For common skate complex, while there have been positive signs in the stocks of both species in parts of the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas (Regions II, III) in terms of increasing catch rates as indicative measures of improvement, both species are still infrequently recorded or absent from some former parts of their geographic range. Both species in the common skate complex are on the prohibited list under EU fishing regulations. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Common skate . The additional information provided by the ‘ Recovery of sensitive species ’ Common Indicator metric found that populations of the common skate complex (Dipturus spp.) were recovering in the Celtic Seas (Region III) and stable in the Wider Atlantic (Region V) (i.e., no further decline).

For spotted ray, ICES stock size indicators show an increasing trend within some OSPAR Regions where the species is assessed, with OSPAR Region II showing a more pronounced increase since 2009. For the Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Regions III, IV), the indicative trend based on stock size is less clear, as there are comparatively wide confidence limits around the estimates and the increases indicated are more recent (i.e., over approximately the last decade). Like all elasmobranchs this species is vulnerable to fishing mortality. Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – Spotted ray . Additionally, the ‘ Recovery of sensitive species ’ Common Indicator metric found that populations of the spotted ray were recovering in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Regions II, III, IV).

For thornback ray, on the basis of ICES assessments the biomass indices and stock size indicators are increasing within OSPAR Regions II and III, either stable (ICES sub-area 8) or increasing (ICES division 9.a) in OSPAR Region IV, while catch rates around the Azores archipelago in OSPAR Region V are stable at a low level. Based on this evidence the overall conclusion on the species’ status is positive and improving, although there is uncertainty (i.e., relatively wide confidence intervals) around some stock-related estimates, and indicative trends are relatively recent (i.e., over the last 5-10 years). Like all elasmobranchs this species is vulnerable to fishing mortality.  Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Overview assessment of implementation reporting. The FC1 metric results for thornback ray are in agreement with the POSH status assessment.

The white skate has disappeared from most areas of its former habitat, with few recent records from the English Channel, western Irish waters and Portuguese waters. No improvement in the status of this stock has been observed since the last OSPAR assessment (OSPAR 2010). Full details of this assessment can be found in OSPAR Status Assessment 2021 – White skate .

Table S.10: Summary of status assessments of OSPAR listed demersal fish

Legend:

Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)
↓       decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
↑       increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
↔     no change observed in the criterion assessed
?       trend unknown in the criterion assessed

OSPAR acts as a coordination platform in the North-East Atlantic for the regional implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) that aims to achieve a Good Environmental Status (GES) in European marine environments, as well as for the coordination of other national frameworks. The characteristics of GES are determined by the individual EU member states, based on criteria elements, threshold values and methodological standards set regionally or at EU level.  
Norwegian, Icelandic, United Kingdom, Greenlandic and Faroese marine areas are not covered by the MSFD.