List of ideas and suggestions from HELCOM HZ 10

4.7 The Meeting was invited to provide feedback on the existing developments and noted that suggestions would be welcomed. The Meeting proposed/discussed that a few items for consideration at this stage (Secretariat, ICES and cooperation with OSPAR and NIVE experts to follow up), including:

I. The Meeting took note that the R code underlying the assessment (i.e. the HELCOM equivalent of the MIME script, adapted to HELCOM specificities) would be updated in the future as part of this process and placed on an open source code repository (i.e. GitHUB) during the development of this system.

II. The addition of a time-to-target panel/tab within the system – i.e. a predictive tool that extrapolates the time to reach Good Environmental Status based on the available trend data.

III. Implementation of the assessment unit level assessment.

IV. The development of a confidence assessment and accompanying map to support each indicator assessment. Aspects discussed included assessing confidence of data based on spatial, temporal and supporting parameter quality factors.

V. A panel/tab that would indicate what of the raw data has been excluded during the analysis and evaluation (i.e. during the MIME script application), and the reason for its exclusion (i.e. lack of sufficient data, missing supporting parameters etc, supporting parameters create pivot points*). Possibly the map could also be adjusted to show such stations as ‘ghost stations’, i.e. in a shaded colour.

VI. A system to identify or automatically flag potential outliers (e.g. those over 10% higher or lower than the main data set) may also be valuable, if possible.

VII. Add the CHASE tool in current form, but acknowledge that further adjustment needed. Adjustment of CHASE integrated assessment tool to improve confidence assessment by ensuring for example two or more independent metals are required for high confidence, and that a lack of coverage of selected major drivers of poor status (e.g. Hg, PBDE or Radioactive substances during HOLAS II) can also influence confidence. Sweden, Germany and Secretariat to develop proposal further after reviewing HOLAS II HZ WS1 outcome.

VIII. When fully functional the assessment, stations and data panels/tabs will all have the same ‘extraction’ date (i.e. all be set to a single date at which the data was taken from the database and into the indicator evaluation).

IX. Updating of the methodology links will be needed to ensure that these reflect the HELCOM assessment approach, e.g. specific threshold values or supporting parameters.

X. The implementation of a DOI system so that data (raw) or assessments (i.e. assessment, stations, accession tabs/panels) for a specific time point/period applied in the automated can be catalogued and preserved as reference material.

XI. Linkage/clarification of station data to assessment data (i.e. clarification between data used in assessments and other data that is reported but not currently applied in indicator assessments, e.g. Fish Disease Index) may also be valid.

XII. Links from accession ID to DOME may also add value. *pivot points occur when, for example, a supporting parameter used for normalisation created a negative value in the assessment output.

4.8 Other related issues were also discussed, including:

I. Clarification that the CHASE tool does not create a dilution effect – i.e. addition of further substances does not result in a dilution of the most influential hazardous substances – and that the system in stead reflects those substances most strongly driving the poor status based on a ration between the threshold value and the assessment value.

II. Deeper understanding of data reporting and options (e.g. simplified reporting) for preparing hazardous substance data for the ICES hosted HELCOM COMBINE database. Latvia and ICES to discuss intersessionally.

III. Ensuring all HELCOM Monitoring and Assessment Guidelines (and indicator reports) are up-to-date and clearly state all required supporting parameters for indicator evaluation.

IV. Possibility to develop and implement regional normalization factors if needed and scientifically justified.

V. Use of ICES DOME and related data in national reporting processes (e.g. when reporting for MSFD purposes) was discussed. General consensus was that ICES and regional sea commission resources (e.g. HELCOM Map and Data services and indicator links) could, and had been utilised by some countries in 2017/18.

VI. Some reported stations are often clustered under the definitions of the ICES station dictionary where closely associated spatial data are reported.