Art8-2024

Member State report / Art8-2024 / 2024 / D10 / Italy / Mediterranean: Adriatic Sea

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art8
Report due	2024-10-15
GES Descriptor	D10 Litter
Member State	Italy
Region/subregion	Mediterranean: Adriatic Sea
Report date	2025-09-11 10:38:38

MAD-IT-MS-AS

Simplified table

Regional assessment area
Component MRUs
GES component	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10	D10
Feature	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Litter and micro-litter in species
Element	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Cloth/textile	Cloth/textile	Cloth/textile	Food waste	Food waste	Food waste	Glass/ceramics	Glass/ceramics	Glass/ceramics	Macrolitter (all)	Macrolitter (all)	Macrolitter (all)	Metal	Metal	Metal	Paper/cardboard	Paper/cardboard	Paper/cardboard	Processed/worked wood	Processed/worked wood	Processed/worked wood	Rubber	Rubber	Rubber	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials
Element extent
Trend element
Element 2										Fishing gear	Fishing gear	Fishing gear	Single-use plastics	Single-use plastics	Single-use plastics																										Caretta caretta
Element source	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	UNEP/MAP
Criterion	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C1	D10C2	D10C3
Parameter	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on seabed	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on water surface	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on water surface	AMO-B
Threshold value upper																									20.0	10000.0	14.4													0.000845
Threshold value lower																											0.6
Threshold value operator																									<=	<=	<=													<=
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source																									MSFD	National	National													UNEP/MAP
Value achieved upper	791.0	1238.0	30000.0		1100.0	17000.0	15.4	25.7	91.4	791.0	17000.0	15.4	1238.0		25.7	111.0		0.3				2025.0	100.0	0.4	546.0	10000.0	98.5	420.0	300.0	0.87	531.0		2.9	121.0	100.0	2.1	108.0	100.0	0.4	0.266343965	0.66
Value achieved lower	1.0	1.0	1.0				0.6	0.6	2.5	1.0		0.6	1.0		0.6	1.0		0.02				1.0		0.03			2.8	1.0		0.02	1.0		0.1	1.0		0.07	1.0		0.02
Value unit	items/100m	items/100m	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre		number of items per square kilometre		items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	items/100m	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square metre	Other
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved																										59.2	22.7
Proportion threshold value unit																									% of stations achieving threshold value	% of stations achieving threshold value	% of stations achieving threshold value													% of stations achieving threshold value
Trend parameter	Improving	Improving	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No	No	No	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No	Unknown
Description parameter	no threshold established	no threshold established	no threshold established	mean	mean	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	median	median	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	no threshold established	mean	mean (ValueUpper: item >2.5 cm / Km2 in coastal areas; ValueLower: item >20 cm / Km2 in offshore areas)	mean	Average grams of ingested litter
Related indicator	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-C	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SB	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C1-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C2-SW	IT-MS-AS_ISCMS_WMS-D10C3-B
Criteria status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not good	Not good	Not good	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not good	Unknown
Description criteria
Element status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not good	Not good	Not good	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not good	Unknown
Description element	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (Art. 8 guidance)	SourceElementList: EU (GES Decision)
Source assessment feature	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National	National
Reporting method feature	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D	Type D
Trend feature	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Integration rule type parameter	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	Not relevant	Not relevant
Integration rule description parameter	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	Combine the litter categories data for macro-litter (all) per compartment used. The parameter outcomes are assessed against threshold values.As per Art. 8 assessment guidance. OOAO at compartment level.	None of the integration rules used. Used only micro-litter (all) in one compartment (surface layer of the water column).
Integration rule type criteria	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status	Proportion of litter categories in good status
GES achieved	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported	GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
Description overall status	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitter for Descriptor 10 were as follows: """"Quantity of litter on the coastline"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated, compared with the threshold value (15° percentile), and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy. """"Quantity of floating litter"""": The median value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). The average value of total litter density per subregion at both coastal and offshore levels was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). """"Quantity of litter on the seabed"""": The median value of total litter density per individual transect was calculated and compared with the threshold value (15° percentile). Based on the percentage of transects falling into a status between high and good, the achievement of GES or nonGES was assessed for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	The methodological approaches for assessing the oveall status of PresEnvLitterMicro for Descriptor 10 were as follows: Quantity of micro-litter in the surface layer of the water column: The average value of total litter density per individual station was calculated and compared with the threshold value, and the percentage of stations falling into GES (Good Environmental Status) or nonGES was determined for each subregion and for the whole of Italy.	Currently, there is no agreed-upon and used threshold value for the indicator of marine litter ingested by turtles, either at the European level or within the framework of the Barcelona Convention. Therefore, an exercise was carried out using the methodology for determining the threshold value for Criterion D10C1, set at the 15th percentile of the total abundance of litter surveyed along the coastline (Van Loon et al., 2020; UNEP/MED WG.550/13). The reference parameter considered was the weight in grams of ingested litter, as proposed for the Fulmarus glacialis (van Franeker et al., 2021) and applied by the countries that are signatories to the OSPAR Convention (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic). The threshold value was calculated by analyzing the entire dataset of litter ingested by sea turtles (years 2017-2021), using only turtles that had ingested at least one piece of plastic and extracting the 15th percentile of the value in grams of ingested litter, which was found to be 0.05 grams of ingested marine litter.The approach of using the 15th percentile is considered suitable for use in the next cycle.
Assessments period	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021	2016-2021
Related pressures	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)	Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
Related targets	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T001 MAD-IT-D10-T003	MAD-IT-D10-T002 MAD-IT-D10-T003
Test TV	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	No	Yes	No	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	No	NA
Test results	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	False	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct	Correct