Upload
admon
View
38
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
CIS workshop – 11&12 June 2007 - Paris national classification systems for the assessment of ecological status of surface waters. 50 participants from 18 countries + EC 11 presentations : DGENV, Austria, Estonia, Czech Republic, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, France - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
EAU ET MILIEUX AQUATIQUES
11-12 June, Paris
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.
CIS workshop – 11&12 June 2007 - Paris national classification systems for the
assessment of ecological status of surface waters
50 participants from 18 countries + EC 11 presentations : DGENV, Austria, Estonia, Czech Republic, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, UK, France 3 sessions :
ecological significance and combination of the biological quality elements role and place of the physico-chemical elements effect of aggregation, uncertainty, confidence & precision
EAU ET MILIEUX AQUATIQUES
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.11-12 June, Paris
General principles set in the guidance are valid
Differencies in implementing in practice the guidance
Part of those differencies is coming from different levels of maturity
How to ensure the comparability of MS approach for classification
Focus on practical aspects Selection of QE can influence the
results of the classification
EAU ET MILIEUX AQUATIQUES
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.11-12 June, Paris
Main conclusion
State of play : different approaches and methods within national classification systems (aggregation of data, combination of QE, automatic OOAO on BQE, use of expert judgement, place of chemistry…)
Therefore, despite the huge ongoing work in the frame of IC, we have no final guarantee of « comparable levels of ambition » between MS
EAU ET MILIEUX AQUATIQUES
CIS workshop : assessment of the ecological status.11-12 June, Paris
Possible follow-up
Need for common views about the classification : « complement » to the classification guidance (in the frame of ECOSTAT activity 4) ?
If agreement, the complement could be based on practical case-studies, in 3 directions :
How to ensure comparability between MS whereas different QE can be used for the classification ??
How to manage risks of misclassification (combination of biological elements, checking procedure for chemistry) ?
How to better communicate about the results of the final assessment ?