In 2009, following approval of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008/56/EC), the European Commission (EC) created task groups to develop guidance for eleven quality descriptors that form the basis for evaluating ecosystem function. The objective was to provide European countries with practical guidelines for implementing the MSFD, and to produce a Commission Decision that encapsulated key points of the work in a legal framework. This paper presents a review of work carried out by the eutrophication task group, and reports our main findings to the scientific community. On the basis of an operational, management-oriented definition, we discuss the main methodologies that could be used for coastal and marine eutrophication assessment. Emphasis is placed on integrated approaches that account for physico-chemical and biological components, and combine both pelagic and benthic symptoms of eutrophication, in keeping with the holistic nature of the MSFD. We highlight general features that any marine eutrophication model should possess, rather than making specific recommendations. European seas range from highly eutrophic systems such as the Baltic to nutrient-poor environments such as the Aegean Sea. From a Highlights ► Eutrophication guidance for the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). ► Operational, management-oriented definition of eutrophication. ► Integrated assessment of physico-chemical and biological components. ► Assessment models combine both pelagic and benthic symptoms of eutrophication. ► Innovative approaches required for meaningful monitoring and assessment.

The aim of European water policy is to achieve good ecological status in all rivers, lakes, coastal and transitional waters by 2027. Currently, more than half of water bodies are in a degraded condition and nutrient enrichment is one of the main culprits. Therefore, there is a pressing need to establish reliable and comparable nutrient criteria that are consistent with good ecological status.This paper highlights the wide range of nutrient criteria currently in use by Member States of the European Union to support good ecological status and goes on to suggest that inappropriate criteria may be hindering the achievement of good status. Along with a comprehensive overview of nutrient criteria, we provide a critical analysis of the threshold concentrations and approaches by which these are set. We identify four essential issues: (1) Different nutrients (nitrogen and/or phosphorus) are used for different water categories in different countries. (2) The use of different nutrient fractions (total, dissolved inorganic) and statistical summary metrics (e.g., mean, percentiles, seasonal, annual) currently hampers comparability between countries, particularly for rivers, transitional and coastal waters. (3) Wide ranges in nutrient threshold values within shared water body types, in some cases showing more than a 10-fold difference in concentrations. (4) Different approaches used to set threshold nutrient concentrations to define the boundary between “good” and “moderate” ecological status. Expert judgement-based methods resulted in significantly higher (less stringent) good-moderate threshold values compared with data-driven approaches, highlighting the importance of consistent and rigorous approaches to criteria setting.We suggest that further development of nutrient criteria should be based on relationships between ecological status and nutrient concentrations, taking into account the need for comparability between different water categories, water body types within these categories, and countries.

The eutrophication status of the entire Baltic Sea is classified using a multi-metric indicatorbased assessment tool. A total of 189 areas are assessed using indicators where information on reference conditions (RefCon), and acceptable deviation (AcDev) from reference condition could be combined with national monitoring data from the

No abstract

Eutrophication (nutrient enrichment and subsequent processes) and its adverse ecosystem effects have been discussed as main issues over the last 20 years in international conferences and conventions for the protection of the marine environment such as the North Sea Conferences and the 1992 OSPAR Convention (OSPAR; which combined and updated the 1972 Oslo Convention on dumping waste at the sea and the 1974 Paris Convention on land-based sources of marine pollution). OSPAR committed itself to reduce phosphorus and nitrogen inputs (in the order of 50% compared with 1985) into the marine areas and 'to combat eutrophication to achieve, by the year 2010, a healthy marine environment where eutrophication does not occur'. Within OSPAR, the Comprehensive Procedure (COMPP) has been developed and used to assess the eutrophication status of the OSPAR maritime area in an harmonised way. This is based on classification in terms of the following types of areas Non-Problem Areas (no effects), Potential Problem Areas (not enough data to assess effects) and Problem Areas (effects due to elevated nutrients and/or due to transboundary transport from adjacent areas). The COMPP consists of a set of harmonised assessment criteria with their area-specific assessment levels and an integrated area classification approach. The criteria cover all aspects of nutrient enrichment (nutrient inputs, concentrations and ratios) as well as possible direct effects (e.g. increased levels of nuisance and/or toxic phytoplankton species, shifts and/or losses of submerged aquatic vegetation) and indirect effects (e.g. oxygen deficiency, changes and/or death of benthos, death of fish, algal toxins). The COMPP also includes supporting environmental factors. It takes account of synergies and harmonisation with the EC Water Framework Directive, and has formed a major