Eutrophication of the Baltic Sea
Eutrophicationof the Baltic SeaBSPC 2017Baltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceBSPCEutrophicationof the Baltic SeaBSPC 2017Baltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceBSPC2Report presented at the 26thBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference – Eutrophication of the Baltic Sea, BSPC 2017T ext: Saara-Sofia SirénEditing: Bodo BahrLayout: produktionsbüro TINUSPhotos: BSPC SecretariatBaltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceBodo Bahr Secretary General +49 171 5512557bodo.bahr@bspcmail.netwww.bspc.netBSPC Secretariatc/o Lennéstraße 1 19053 SchwerinGermanyThe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) was established in 1991 as a forum forpolitical dialogue between parliamentarians from the Baltic Sea Region. BSPC aims at rais-ing awareness and opinion on issues of current political interest and relevance for the Baltic Sea Region. It promotes and drives various in-itiatives and efforts to support a sustainable environmental, social and economic develop-ment of the Baltic Sea Region. It strives at en-hancing the visibility of the Baltic Sea Region and its issues in a wider European context.BSPC gathers parliamentarians from 11national parliaments, 11 regional parliaments and 5 parliamentary organisations around the Baltic Sea. The BSPC thus constitutes aunique parliamentary bridge between all theEU- and non-EU countries of the Baltic SeaRegion.BSPC external interfaces include parlia-mentary, governmental, sub-regional and oth-er organizations in the Baltic Sea Region andthe Northern Dimension area, among themCBSS, HELCOM, the Northern Dimension Partnership in Health and Social Well-Being (NDPHS), the Baltic Sea Labour Forum (BSLF), the Baltic Sea States Sub-regional Co-operation (BSSSC) and the Baltic Develop-ment Forum.BSPC shall initiate and guide political ac-tivities in the region; support and strengthen democratic institutions in the participating states; improve dialogue between govern-ments, parliaments and civil society; strength-en the common identity of the Baltic Sea Re-gion by means of close co-operation between national and regional parliaments on the basis of equality; and initiate and guide political ac-tivities in the Baltic Sea Region, endowing them with additional democratic legitimacy and parliamentary authority.The political recommendations of the an-nual Parliamentary Conferences are expressed in a Conference Resolution adopted by con-sensus by the Conference. The adopted Reso-lution shall be submitted to the governments of the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the EU, and disseminated to other relevant na-tional, regional and local stakeholders in the Baltic Sea Region and its neighbourhood.3Contents1. Introduction ..................................... 42. Background ..................................... 62.1. Eutrophication ................................ 62.2. Cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region .............. 473. Latest research data on eutrophication ................ 93.1. HELCOM’s ‘State of the Baltic Sea’ report .......... 103.2. Special Report by the European Courtof Auditors (ECA) ............................. 124. Eutrophication is not the only threat to the Baltic Sea ... 144.1. Climate change ............................... 144.2. Marine litter ................................. 155. Further discussion and possible solutions ............. 165.1. Circular economy ............................. 165.2. River basin management ........................ 185.3. Agri-environmental schemes and funding ........... 195.4. More ambition is needed ....................... 20References ......................................... 214 1. Introduction1. IntroductionAfter air, water is our most important resource. Yet water is wastedin unbelievable ways and seas have become our landfills. Globally,most water is used for agriculture. Water, particularly clean water, isa very political topic all over the world. Due to global warming and climate change, we may have to face a range of challenges such as drought, scarcity of fresh water, and lack of clean habitats and ahealthy environment.A clean sea is an important piece of the ecological puzzle. The Bal-tic Sea is one of the most vulnerable and polluted seas in the world.Eutrophication, which is mainly caused by nitrogen and phospho-rus loads from land-based sources, is the main cause of the Baltic Sea’s currently challenging status. We now know that the conditionof the Baltic Sea involves several major challenges in addition to eu-trophication. For example, climate change, toxic substances and marine litter are aggravating the problems we already have.Saara-Sofia Sirén Member of theFinnish Parliament5 1. IntroductionI have been named as the BSPC rapporteur regarding eutrophica-tion of the Baltic Sea. From my viewpoint, this task includes:• distributing existing information on the eutrophication of theBaltic Sea• introducing the latest research data as a topic of discussion• introducing the latest interaction from HELCOM meetings and other events concerning the condition of the Baltic Sea• underlining some hot topics that should be addressed and• presenting a few possible solutions for considerationThe status of the Baltic Sea remains alarming, despite all the strate-gies, programmes, commitments and funding implemented withinthe Baltic Sea Region since the 1980s. Much work still lies ahead ofus in ensuring that our children have the opportunity to enjoy and sustainably benefit from the Baltic Sea that unites us all.6 2. Background2. BackgroundThe Baltic Sea is a young, small, stressed and sensitive ecosystem. Asemi-enclosed sea and one of the largest brackish water basins in theworld, it is located between Scandinavia and mainland Europe. TheBaltic Sea is linked to the North Sea by a very narrow and shallow passage, which creates challenges in terms of inflows of salt water and the renewal of water masses.The sea is critical to all coastal states located in the drainage basin.The ecological condition of the Baltic Sea affects not only our natu-ral heritage, but also the wellbeing, livelihood and health of the 85 million people living on its shores. However, the most dramatic en-vironmental load and pressure on the Baltic Sea are the results ofhuman action.From an economical viewpoint, the condition of our waters can beviewed as a market failure impacting on people’s lives. Water pollu-tion can in fact be regarded as an external cost, which requires ac-tion from the governments concerned.2.1. EutrophicationThe most serious environmental problems affecting the Baltic Sea are the result of eutrophication. Much effort has been put into im-proving this situation; however, we have been unsuccessful in get-ting these waters back into good condition. The Baltic Sea is still af-fected by eutrophication, despite a decrease in the amount of phos-phorus and nitrogen.Nutrients cause eutrophication; enrichment of nutrients is leadingto excessive growth of algal and plant life, and therefore eutrophica-tion, in most of the Baltic Sea.The two main nutrients affecting the Baltic Sea are nitrogen andphosphorus. According to HELCOM’s Updated Fifth Baltic Sea Pol-lution load Compilation (2015), the total nutrient input in 2010 was 977,000 tons of nitrogen and 38,300 tons of phosphorus. If the numbers are adjusted to take account of inter-annual variation andmeteorology effects, the inputs are lower: 802,000 tons of nitrogen7 2. Backgroundand 32,200 tons of phosphorus. The largest quantities of nutrientsoriginate from three countries: Poland, Russia and Sweden.2.2. Cooperation in the Baltic Sea RegionWe all share this unique sea. Nine countries have a coastline on the Baltic Sea: Finland, Sweden, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Po-land, Germany and Denmark. The catchment area is even wider, in-cluding states such as Belarus, the Czech Republic, Norway, Slova-kia and Ukraine. Overall, the Baltic Sea affects the lives of tens of millions of people.International cooperation is vital to decreasing the eutrophicationof the Baltic Sea. International documents such as the EU Marine Strategy, the Baltic Sea Action Plan of the Baltic Marine Environ-ment Commission and the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Regioncreate a framework for political decision-making regarding the Bal-tic Sea, and thus form a basis for activities related to improving its condition.The Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) is an ambitious programmeadopted by the EU and all coastal states of the Baltic Sea in 2007. The plan aims to achieve a healthy Baltic Sea by the year 2021 andprovides the basis for the work of HELCOM (the Helsinki Com-mission).To achieve the joint goal, set by the coastal states, for a healthierBaltic Sea the Action Plan would have to be fully implemented onan urgent basis.The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR) is an agree-ment between the EU member states and the Commission to deep-en cooperation in the Baltic Sea region. The Strategy aims to im-prove cooperation between member states and to allocate funds toprojects in the most beneficial manner possible. The overall goal ofthe Strategy is to solve the region’s problems and take better advan-tage of existing opportunities.The implementation of the EUSBSR is based on three objectives; 1.Save the sea, 2. Connect the region, 3. Increase prosperity. No fund-ing has been allocated for the Strategy, but the idea is to align exist-ing funding with the jointly agreed actions and projects. The mem-ber states are cooperating on the implementation of the plan withPhoto: Jens Büttner/dpa8 2. Backgroundthe Commission, other member states, regional and local authori-ties, and inter-governmental and non-governmental bodies.The European Union Marine Strategy requires that member statesdevelop strategies to achieve a good environmental status by 2020. The aim of these strategies is to protect the marine environment andprevent any further damage caused by human activities. It under-lines the need for cooperation between the countries involved. The EU Marine Strategy also requires member states to assess the envi-ronmental status of their marine waters, set targets and create a pro-gramme, which includes various measures. Evaluation and moni-toring are also required.9 3. Latest research data on eutrophication3. Latest research data oneutrophicationWe have some good news regarding the status of the Baltic Sea – butstill not enough. The condition of the Baltic Sea has changed dra-matically in recent decades. As the sea is semi-enclosed, it suffersfrom a lack of inflow of saltwater. Indeed, the inflow of nutrients is one of the main causes of the Baltic Sea’s present condition. The two main nutrients affecting the sea are nitrogen and phosphorus. En-richment by these nutrients leads to excessive growth of algal andplant life.Nutrient inputs to the Baltic Sea have, in fact, been reduced duringthe last decades. According to the latest HELCOM Baltic Sea pol-lution load compilation (2015), the amount of nitrogen input hasfallen by more than 200,000 tons and phosphorus input by 7,000 tons per year.Eutrophication is still affecting the Baltic Sea, despite the fall in theamount of phosphorus and nitrogen. The nutrient input has not been decreasing as planned and a deterioration has occurred in thecondition of three quarters of Finnish coastal waters, for example.Agriculture is the main source of nitrogen and phosphorus thatcause eutrophication. Whereas nutrient loads from urban agglom-erations have been decreasing – mainly thanks to improved wastewater systems – the nutrient load from agriculture has remained the same. In some countries, the nutrient load caused by agriculture haseven increased.A significant step in implementing the Baltic Sea Action Plan tookthe form of a decision made by the Helsinki Commission HEL-COM in March 2016 when, at its Annual Meeting, HELCOMagreed to submit a proposal for a Baltic Sea Nitrogen Oxide Emis-sion Control Area (NECA). The proposal was submitted to the In-ternational Maritime Organization IMO in autumn 2016. IMOagreed to limit Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions from ships’ ex-haust gases in the Baltic Sea as proposed by HELCOM countries.Since emissions from shipping cause most airborne deposition ofnitrogen into the Baltic Sea, it is anticipated that NECA will lead to a significant reduction in nitrogen pollution.10 3. Latest research data on eutrophicationAs part of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive, EU coun-tries are required to control the cost-efficiency of any new measurestaken. It is important to note that the cost-efficiency evaluation ofmeasures taken to end the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea may not be reasonable in some cases. This observation was made in a report examining the cost-efficiency of measures taken under the Finnishmarine strategy.Eutrophication is a major problem in the Baltic Sea and repairingthe damage is a complex and time-consuming task. The results maybecome visible only after a long period of time. In their report,Oinonen et al point out that account should be taken of this when evaluating strategies.3.1. HELCOM’s ‘State of the Baltic Sea’ reportAccording to HELCOM’s Assessment of 2010, the environmental status of the Baltic Sea can be regarded as ‘impaired’ in general. Al-though steps have been taken towards reducing the nutrient input,only one or two areas of the Baltic Sea are currently unaffected by eutrophication.The HELCOM report also states that point-source inputs of nitro-gen and phosphorus to the Baltic Sea decreased by 60 percent and 68 percent between 1990 and 2000, and total inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus were reduced by 30 percent and 45 percent be-tween 1990 and 2006. However, atmospheric nitrogen depositionmay even have increased during the same period, making the net re-duction much smaller. Shipping, which is a crucial contributor toatmospheric nitrogen deposition, is increasing in the Baltic Sea.HELCOM published the first version of its latest ‘State of the Bal-tic Sea’ report in July 2017, which provides scientific informationregarding the environmental status of the Baltic Sea. Besides pre-senting an assessment of the current status and the pressures and impacts on the Baltic Sea marine environment, the report includesanalyses of various social and economic impacts. The related datawas prepared in close cooperation with Baltic Sea countries in 2015-2017. The timeline covered by the report is 2011 to 2015.The first version of the report is now available for consultation andthe final version will be published after an update in June 2018, when new and complementary data will be added.11 3. Latest research data on eutrophicationFor the HELCOM report, the eutrophication status of the BalticSea has been evaluated using core indicators. These core indicatorsare still under development and some new ones have been addedsince the previous status report. The indicators assessed have been divided on the basis of three criteria: nutrient levels and the direct and indirect effects of eutrophication.The key findings of the report can be divided into three topics: 1)eutrophication, 2) hazardous substances and 3) biodiversity. In this report, I will focus only on the findings regarding the eutrophica-tion of the Baltic Sea.Eutrophication affects over 95 percent of the Baltic Sea region. Incomparison to the previous HELCOM report, the eutrophicationstatus has improved in two out of seventeen open-sea assessmentunits – whereas the situation has deteriorated in seven units.The report shows how net inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus intothe Baltic Sea sub-basins have changed over recent years. There hasbeen a significant reduction: nitrogen inputs have decreased by 13 percent in total and phosphorus inputs have decreased by 19 per-cent. Most remarkable is the reduction of phosphorus in the Gulf ofFinland, where a change of 50 percent occurred between 1997-2003 and 2012-2014. The only increase in net inputs to sub-basins is a 3.2 percent increase in the phosphorus load into the Gulf ofRiga.However, despite falling nutrient loads from land areas, there hasbeen no improvement in the Baltic Sea’s environmental status ingeneral, at least not yet. Positive outcomes may take time to appear.“Although signs of improvement can be seen in some areas, the ef-fects of past and current nutrient inputs still predominate in terms of the overall status,” the report states.According to the comprehensive report by HELCOM, the targetsset in the Baltic Sea Action Plan will not be achieved on time. Thisis the case, despite improvements in management.Eutrophication has a cost. The HELCOM report states that the to-tal annual loss of benefits from eutrophication in the Baltic Sea re-gion totals around 4,000 million euros. This shows how much the welfare of citizens living around the sea would increase if a better eutrophication status were achieved.12 3. Latest research data on eutrophication3.2. Special Report by the European Court ofAuditors (ECA)According to a recent Special Report by the European Court of Au-ditors (ECA, 2016), our work towards creating a healthier BalticSea lacks implementation and targeting. Actions by Member Stateshave resulted in only limited progress and investments have not been as effective as hoped.Between 2007 and 2013, the EU provided 4.6 billion euros inco-funding for waste water collection and treatment projects in the Member States. Funding towards agricultural development pro-jects, including water protection programmes, totalled 9.9 billion euros.In its report, the ECA criticises the lack of action taken by the EUMember States. Measures taken towards placing agriculture on amore sustainable basis are inadequate, given the pressure the sectoris imposing on the Baltic Sea. More defined programmes and effec-tive measures are needed. The ECA also reminds readers of the re-port that Member States are ultimately responsible for drawing upprogrammes involving the actions necessary to cleaning up theirwaste waters.The ECA auditors visited Poland, Latvia and Finland, whereas ques-tionnaires were sent to Sweden, Lithuania, Estonia, Germany andDenmark. The auditors found that, at the time of the inspection (2012), the input of nutrients was even higher in some cases thancompared with the 1997-2003 average. Nitrogen inputs were high-er in the case of Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.Agriculture is still the main source of nutrient input to the BalticSea. A report by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) reveals thatwe have failed to target our measures at the most problematic areas, where the nutrient flow into the Baltic Sea is significant.One problem lies in the inadequacy of the area identified as a ni-trate vulnerable zone. Secondly, because agri-environmentalschemes offer limited compensation payments to farmers, the farmscausing most pollution do not apply for them.Despite significant EU funding for waste water collection and treat-ment projects, the execution of the waste water directive has beendelayed. The Court also notes that the European Commission has not acted firmly enough when breaches have been detected: the Commission must ensure that measures are implemented in13 3. Latest research data on eutrophicationaccordance with what has been agreed at European level, and mustbe ready to take legal action more quickly against non-compliantmember states.According to the ECA, EU co-funding (44 million euro between2001 and 2014) for the waste water collection and treatment infra-structure in Russia and Belarus is cost-efficient, but implementationis slow and resources are very limited compared to what is required.In its report, the ECA suggests that the Baltic Sea region states raisethe ambition of their nutrient reduction plans and add appropriateindicators in order to achieve their targets. To improve the effective-ness of actions combating eutrophication in the Baltic Sea, the Court of Auditors makes a number of recommendations for the Eu-ropean Commission and Member States:The Commission should:• require that Member States designate the appropriate nitratevulnerable zones• decrease the time needed to assess compliance with the urban waste water treatment directive• continue to promote projects aimed at reducing the flow of nutrient loads into the Baltic Sea from Russia and Belarus• The Member States should:• target agri-environmental schemes and funding at areas where the nutrient flow into the Baltic Sea is significant• establish nitrate action programme rules based on the most re-cent scientific evidence• plan and construct their waste water infrastructure as efficient-ly as possible14 4. Eutrophication is not the only threat to the Baltic Sea4. Eutrophication is not theonly threat to the Baltic SeaThere are a number of threats to the Baltic Sea besides eutrophica-tion. These include oil spills, hazardous substances and chemicals,noise, overfishing, shipping and the reduction of biodiversity, all ofwhich pose various problems and challenges to the wellbeing of the Baltic Sea.In this report, I have decided to raise two of the main concernswhich I feel the BSPC should focus on, alongside eutrophication, inits efforts to achieve a healthier Baltic Sea.4.1. Climate changeExpert bodies such as the Finnish Environment Institute (2015) be-lieve that global climate change is affecting the climate in the north-ernmost parts of the world. Unfortunately, climate change will onlyworsen the problems caused and threats posed by eutrophication.Surface waters will become warmer as average temperatures rise,particularly during the summer. This will have multiple impacts,leading, for example, to further changes in the habitats and repro-duction of species and organisms living in the Baltic Sea.Another predicted consequence is an even higher amount of rain-fall, particularly during the winter months. As a result, the salinity level will decrease even further, intensifying the effects of eutrophi-cation. As the quantities of nutrients, rainfall and flooding increaseand the amount of oxygen in the sea decreases, water will be “depos-ited”.Global climate change will therefore significantly amplify the effectsof nutrient load. Growth and the sinking of organic matter will fur-ther increase the oxygen uptake of solids, leading to the release ofsediment-bound phosphorus back into the water, which will fur-ther increase eutrophication.15 4. Eutrophication is not the only threat to the Baltic Sea4.2. Marine litterEutrophication has been the main cause of the problems affecting theBaltic Sea for decades. However, it is not the only threat to the Baltic.Frustratingly, marine litter, which is an emerging environmental threatin the area, is the result of our own negligence.Marine litter is now a very topical subject. Such litter, particularly inthe form of micro plastics, was mentioned by many of the Baltic Seaarea countries attending the HELCOM meeting in Helsinki in Febru -ary 2017. The countries discussed matters such as whether the use of micro plastics in cosmetics should be banned in the near future. Ofcourse, the problem is much wider than this.We simply cannot afford to use our sea as an underwater landfill. Re-gardless of this, millions of tons of refuse, mainly plastic, end up in theBaltic Sea every year. According to recent research, the amount of re -fuse in coastal areas has increased, particularly on urban beaches. De -spite this, most litter is hidden from sight on the seabed.In rough terms, we could say that 70 percent of marine litter is lying atthe bottom of the sea and only 15 percent can be found on the shores where it remains visible. Up to 80 percent of marine litter comes from land. Although rivers are the main source, in winter, for example, litteris literally poured into the sea within snow cleared from roads, whichmany coastal cities still dump onto the sea ice.Marine litter is harming and endangering the ecosystem and diversityof the Baltic Sea. Marine litter – plastic refuse in particular – cause arange of problems. Plastic dumped into the oceans is broken down and smoothed into small particles which cannot be removed.Animals living in the sea and on shorelines are affected by this in anumber of ways – for example, they may become entangled in garbage and suffocate. It has been found that around 80 percent of northernfulmars living in the Northern Atlantic have plastic in their stomachs.It is not yet known what effects micro plastic and thus chemicals will have when ingested by wildlife, but they may well end up on the plates of humans eating fish.Marine litter and micro plastics cause other problems in addition tothose mentioned above. Refuse makes beaches ugly, thereby impactingon our opportunities to enjoy the nature.To decrease the amount of litter, we need to ensure effective wastemanagement, support good practices and consumer behaviour, andwork towards decreasing the use of plastic in general.16 5. Further discussion and possible solutions5. Further discussion andpossible solutions5.1. Circular economyAlthough eutroph ication of the Baltic Sea has been widely re -searched, most studies of this kind have focused on the history andcurrent situation in the Baltic Sea and had already been completedin the 90s. There would therefore seem to be a place for a future-ori -ented perspective on research on the Baltic Sea. Some fresh, academ -ic, future-oriented discussion of ways to save the Baltic Sea is there -fore sorely needed.The circular economy, an economic model which involves creatingadded value through a smarter way of doing things, could provide an overall approach to achieving a healthier Baltic Sea. In the circular economy, the focus is on reusing materials and creating as little wasteas possible, if any.The circular economy is not about repairing damage that has alreadybeen done. Programmes and strategies would still be needed in orderto reduce the eutrophication of the sea. However, the circular econ-omy could lead to the adoption of a lifestyle that no longer causespollution and damage.The recently published European Commission Circular Economypackage sets stricter targets for the use of natural resources and di -rects political decision-making towards achieving more sustainable outcomes.One example involves recycling nutrients from agriculture for reuse,rather than burdening the environment. Happily, current govern-ment activities are also playing a major role in decreasing eutrophi -cation caused by nutrient loading. A concrete example of this can be seen in the recycling of nutrients from agriculture.The circular economy has huge potential to decrease eutrophicationand restore trust between environmentalists and the agricultural lob-by on a ‘win-win’ basis, which will undoubtedly facilitate further co -operation. Another important measure involves elevating the overall level of the recycling and reuse of everyday materials and products.17 5. Further discussion and possible solutionsExpressed simply, the circular economy is a way of doing thingsmore intelligently, which has the potential to benefit all partieswhen done properly. This would pave the way for an entirely newbusiness ecosystem with the potential to create new jobs, new mer-chandise, wellbeing, bigger harvests and a healthier Baltic Sea.Indeed, the circular economy has huge market potential. Accordingto estimates by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, on a global basis this represents an economic opportunity worth hundreds of billions dollars.The main threats to the Baltic Sea – eutrophication and marine lit-ter – could be tackled by adopting the circular economy in our busi-ness practices and lifestyles. What would this require from our stateinstitutions, companies, society in general and international coop-eration?The difficulty is that effective and efficient utilisation of the circulareconomy requires a new way of thinking. First, we need to changethe way we view materials, consumption and waste. There is a say-ing that fits well with the key idea underlying the circular economy; “a poor man cannot afford to buy cheap”. Natural resources will notlast if we continue with our current lifestyle based on disposablegoods. We should move towards maximising the utility of the ma-terials we use, by choosing and using materials wisely and makingproducts long-lasting.To make the circular economy function properly, consumers mustlearn how (and be willing) to make sustainable purchasing deci-sions. Willingness to share, recycle and reuse products forms the ba-sis of the circular economy. Education and information are needed so that everyone can participate. Recycling must be made easy for everyone on a very concrete level.18 5. Further discussion and possible solutions5.2. River basin managementThe circular economy, recycling and better waste disposal are key el-ements in saving the Baltic Sea. Nutrients and litter originating onland are the key cause of the main problems; to address these issues,we must act in riverside areas in particular.In its report of 2016, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) foundseveral shortcomings in some of the river basin management plansaudited. The report states that “The Commission and the Court have already highlighted similar weaknesses in other river basin management plans”. It also recommends that Member States be-come more consistent in assessing and monitoring the nutrients inriver basins and nutrient inputs into the Baltic Sea. Naturally, lackof proper data is hampering evaluation of the measures’ cost-effec-tiveness.Cooperation between the countries of the Baltic Sea region is im-portant, since many of the great rivers flowing into the sea run through more than one country. According to Article 3 of the Wa-ter Framework Directive (WFD), international river basin districtsmust be created for river basins that cover the territory of more than one EU Member State. The International River Basin Commissions play an important role in coordinating the implementation of theWater Framework Directive.River basin management areas play a key role in decreasing the nu-trient load and marine litter in the Baltic Sea. I believe that evengreater priority should be given to national and international work in the river basin areas. Successful cooperation between different countries sharing a river basin district is of particular importance,regardless whether or not the states in question are EU members.The nitrate vulnerable zones of the river catchment areas must bemore carefully identified. More attention should also be paid togathering accurate data on the quantities of nutrients flowing intothe Baltic Sea via rivers. Facts and accurate data will lie at the veryheart of success in achieving the targets set in the plans for improv-ing the status of the Baltic Sea.There is a mutual understanding between the HELCOM states thatnew data and research are required on marine litter, in particular.This view was presented in numerous statements given during the Helsinki meeting of HELCOM in February 2017.19 5. Further discussion and possible solutions5.3. Agri-environmental schemes and fundingAgriculture is the main source of nutrient inputs to the Baltic Sea,which remain considerable despite all the plans made to decreasethem.The European Court of Auditors (ECA) report reveals that we arefailing to achieve the related goals because the related measures arenot targeted at the most problematic areas with respect to nutrientflows. Furthermore, the most polluting farms do not apply for agri-environmental schemes and funding, due to the limited com-pensation payments available. Furthermore, Member States do not penalise offenders because the ‘polluter pays’ principle is difficult toapply to agriculture.On the other hand, it is critical that we view agriculture as the solu-tion rather than the problem. Both farmers and the environmentwill benefit from the circular economy and nutrient recycling. Mu-tual and enlightened self-interest forms the best way of engaging all parties in working towards a healthier Baltic Sea.For example, mutually beneficial actions would involve developinginstruments within the agricultural support system that motivate farmers to engage in more environmental friendly production, espe-cially in the key areas with the greatest impact on the Baltic Sea.Under this scheme, the same amount of aid would be divided in dif-ferent ways to now, and be subject to authorisation. This measurewould therefore affect the allocation criteria of environmental com-pensation, not the amount of compensation itself.In their report, Oinonen et al. state that efforts to develop EU envi-ronmental compensation systems could have a major impact on theamount of emissions into waters. Such measures are viewed as im-portant and cost-effective approaches to marine protection.Information and education on the opportunities represented by re-generative agriculture modes of production would help in achievingthese aims. In general, more research and innovations focusing onsustainable agriculture are needed in this regard.20 5. Further discussion and possible solutions5.4. More ambition is neededHELCOM Member States have referred to the need to update theBaltic Sea Action Plan. The updating and modification of the planwould be a good idea and it would be important that HELCOMcountries are ready for this.However, there is a risk that, once the process is open, pressure willmount to modify the targets as well. In my opinion, the BSPCshould take a strong stand on the current, ambitious targets – mean-ing that we want to ensure that the HELCOM targets will remain ambitious and sufficiently concrete when the action plan is updated and modified and that we do not settle for targets less ambitiousthan the current ones.More work must be done to improve the condition of the Baltic Seato ‘good’. The objectives of the current plans and agreements mustbe pursued more vigorously. Implementation is the key.The quantity of litter, waste water and nutrients coming from theland must be decreased. In this regard, cooperation in the rivercatchment areas is important and commonly agreed standards and strategies must be adhered to.Education and research are making innovations and new solutionspossible. Science and knowledge must lead the way in fulfilling lo-cal, national and international strategies while policy making, lawsand subsidies must firmly direct us towards a more sustainableeconomy.21 ReferencesReferencesBaltic Marine Environment Bibliography: EnvironmentalConditions in the Baltic Sea Region