Member State report / Art8esa / 2018 / Latvia

Report type Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article Art. 8.1c Economic and social analysis
Report due 2018-10-15
Member State Latvia
Reported by Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology
Report date 2019-04-11
Report access msfd2018-ART8_ESA.xml

Baltic Sea

Marine reporting unit
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
  • BAL-LV-AAA-006
Feature
Fish and shellfish harvesting (professional, recreational)
Fish and shellfish processing
Restructuring of seabed morphology, including dredging and depositing of materials
Tourism and leisure activities
Transport infrastructure
Transport - shipping
All ecosystem services underpinning physical and intellectual interactions
All pressures
Input or spread of non-indigenous species
Eutrophication
Litter in the environment
NACE codes
  • Marine fishing
  • Processing and preserving of fish, crustaceans and molluscs
  • Construction of water projects
  • 3011; 3012; 3315; 5210; 5222; 5224; 5229
  • 5010; 5020
Related GES component
  • D1.1; D1.4; D1.6; D3; D4/D1; D5; D6/D1
  • D2C1 Newly-introduced NIS
  • D5C2; D5C3
  • D10
Description
Activity: Commercial Fishing. Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Estimates for the national fisheries activities in the Baltic Sea (values from the fishing in other seas/oceans are NOT included). Confidence assessment of the estimates: Moderate-High confidence. Other indicators on size of activity for characterising past trend (data for 2011-2016): - Catch by main species, tons/y, in the Baltic Sea. - Number of fishing vessels, in the Baltic Sea.
Activity: Fish processing Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Data for the national fish processing industry, using raw materials as input for the production from various seas and oceans. Only part of the input materials for the production comes from the Baltic Sea, however this amount could not be estimated. Thus 100 % of the national production is accounted. Confidence assessment of the estimates: Low confidence (because the Baltic Sea related part could not be estimated). Other indicators on size of activity for characterising past trend (data for 2011-2016): - Produced fish products – volume (tons) and value (EUR) per year.
Activity: Infrastructure and service activities related to the sea transport – Construction of water projects (assumed to include dredging and disposal of dredged material). Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Data for the national activity on the whole (accounting 100 %), although considerable part of the activity could be related to construction projects in inland waters which is not related to the sea use but could not be separated. Confidence assessment of the estimates: Low confidence (considerable part of the activity could be related to inland waters which could not be separated).
Activity: Marine related tourism and leisure services’ activities. Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Expenditures (EUR/y) of travellers (national and foreign tourists) for leisure trips to the coastal cities and counties. - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Estimates for the coastal area based on data for coastal cities and counties (a list is provided), but excluding the capital city Riga. The expenditure is assumed to reflect turnover of all economic activities serving the marine related tourism and leisure (thus NACE codes are not specified). VA and employment is estimated based on this turnover. Confidence assessment of the estimates: Moderate confidence (because the estimates involve assumptions and calculations). Other indicators on size of activity for characterising past trend (data for 2011-2016): - Number of coastal tourism accommodation establishments. - Number of persons served in the coastal tourism accommodation establishments. - Number of person nights spent in the coastal tourism accommodation establishments. - Number of person nights spent in the coastal tourism accommodation establishments by foreign tourists for leisure trips.
Activity: Infrastructure and service activities related to the sea transport, including: 1) Building of ships and floating structures, Building of pleasure and sporting boats. 2) Repair and maintenance of ships and boats. 3) Service activities incidental to water transportation. 4) Warehousing and storage, Cargo handling, Other transportation support activities. Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Other indicators on size of activities for characterising past trend (data for 2011-2016): see "Related indicators". 1) For NACE C3011 and C3012: Estimates related to the national marine waters – only the national production amount which is supplied to the national market is accounted (20 % of the total national production, because other part is exported). Confidence level of the estimates: Low-Moderate confidence (because the national marine waters’ related part is estimated using assumption based on information in literature). 2) For NACE C3315: Data for the national activities on the whole (accounting 100 %), although small part of the activity could serve inland shipping which is not related to the sea use but could not be separated. Confidence level of the estimates: Moderate confidence (because inland shipping related part could not be separated). 3) For NACE H5222: Estimates for the activity which is related to the marine shipping (accounting 80 % of the total activity). The inland shipping related part is excluded based on analysis of statistical data. Confidence level of the estimates: Moderate confidence (because the marine shipping related part is estimated). 4) For NACE H5210, H5224, H5229: Estimates for part of the activities related to serving the marine shipping as transportation mode (accounting 2.8 % of the total production). The given activities serve also other transportation modes, and respective amounts are excluded based on analysis of statistical data (input-output tables of the national accounts, intermediate consumption accounting production of R52 which is consumed by H50.10 and H50.20). Confidence level of the estimates: Low-Moderate confidence (because the marine shipping related part is estimated, and the available statistical data don’t provide sufficient basis for assessment with higher confidence).
Activity: Marine shipping Marine water accounts approach. Used indicators: - Value added at factor costs, EUR per year. - Number of employees in FTE (direct employment). Data year: 2016. Data for the national marine shipping sector including sea and coastal passenger and freight water transport (100 % of the national marine shipping). Confidence assessment of the estimates: High confidence. Other indicators on size of activity for characterising past trend (data for 2011-2016): - Number of companies. - Number of employed persons.
1) Monetary assessments of recreational benefits. Ecosystem Services approach. Indicator: Consumer surplus (EUR per person per leisure trip), aggregated national benefits from leisure at the sea (EUR/y). Data year: 2016. Result: National benefits from leisure at the sea 482.5 million EUR per year The estimate is derived from a national travel cost study implemented in 2016-2017. 2) Importance of benefits from “cultural ecosystem services” Ecosystem Services approach. Indicator: Relative importance of the benefits from the “cultural ecosystem services” (covering all "cultural ecosystem services", 8 ecosystem services are distinguished). Data year: 2017. Assessment approach: Assessment of relative importance of the benefits from each “cultural ecosystem service”. The assessments are derived from a national survey implemented in 2016-2017. Respondents were asked to distribute 100 points among the listed “cultural ecosystem services”. The result shows that, besides the recreational benefits (which have been monetised and range in 480 million per year), the value is attached also to other “cultural ecosystem services”. Result: Relative importance of various “cultural ecosystem services” (100 points in total): - Opportunities for recreational activities (e.g. swimming, angling, walking, boating, bird watching) – 46 points, - Enjoyment from landscapes – 20 points, - Habitats for many animals and plants [reflects non-use value] – 11 points, - Spiritual experiences, sense of belonging, and symbolic meaning – 6 points, - Inspiration for artistic work – 5 points, - Experiencing historically and culturally important places – 5 points, - Other not mentioned in the list above – 4 points, - An environment for learning and gaining new information – 3 points.
Employment (direct *1000 FTE)
0.342
3.188
0.563
2.431
2.614
0.569
Production value (€ million)
Value added (€ million)
10.2
39.2
12.89
23.4
95.77
15.32
Related pressures
  • PresBioExtractSpp; PresPhyDisturbSeabed
  • Changes to hydrological conditions
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Newly-introduced non-indigenous species
Related indicators
  • Catch by main species
  • in the Baltic Sea
  • in the Baltic Sea; Number of fishing vesels
  • tons/y
  • Produced fish products – volume t and value EUR
  • Cargo flow through the Latvian ports (tons/y); Number of companies; Number of employed persons; Number of passengers through the Latvian ports
  • Number of companies
  • data for 2011-2016
  • data for 2011-2016; Number of employed persons
Related ecosystem services
  • EcosysServInteracPhyAll; EcosysServInteracSpiAll
Cost of degradation: description
Cost of degradation in relation to state of the marine biodiversity. Cost of degradation (CoD) as foregone benefits due to failing GES. Comparing business as usual scenario (BAU) state (in 2020) and GES. Since the BAU state has been assessed to be the same as the current state (2017), the same CoD in both scenarios. The estimate covers CoD in relation to state and diversity of marine birds, fish, plants, other ecosystem components like conditions of the sea bed, as well impacts of relevant pressures on the marine biodiversity (e.g. eutrophication, physical pressures). Thus, the results are attributable to D1, D4 and D6, partly also D3, as well as D5 covering negative impacts on the marine biodiversity. Indicator: National cost of degradation (foregone benefits) EUR/y. Data year: 2017. The estimate is based on data from a choice experiment study (based on national survey) implemented in Latvia in 2016-2017.
Cost of degradation in relation to introduction of new alien species. Cost of degradation (CoD) as foregone benefits due to failing GES. Comparing business as usual scenario (BAU) state (in 2020) and GES. Since the BAU state has been assessed to be the same as the current state (2017), the same CoD in both scenarios. The estimate covers CoD in relation to introduction of new invasive alien species (invasive are those creating negative impact on the marine ecosystem or marine uses). Thus, the result is attributable to D2 covering all negative impacts on the marine ecosystem from new invasive alien species. Indicator: National cost of degradation (foregone benefits) EUR/y. Data year: 2017. The estimate is based on data from two choice experiment studies (based on national surveys) implemented in Latvia in 2013 and 2016-2017.
Cost of degradation in relation to impacts of eutrophication on water quality for recreation. Cost of degradation (CoD) as foregone benefits due to failing GES. Comparing business as usual scenario (BAU) state (in 2020) and GES. Since the BAU state has been assessed to be the same as the current state (2017), the same CoD in both scenarios. The estimate covers CoD in relation to impacts of eutrophication (D5) on the marine water quality for recreation (other negative impacts of the eutrophication on the marine ecosystem are not accounted here). Indicator: National cost of degradation (foregone benefits) EUR/y. Data year: 2017. The estimate is based on data from two choice experiment studies (based on national surveys) implemented in Latvia in 2013 and 2016-2017.
Cost of degradation in relation to litter in the marine environment. Cost of degradation (CoD) as foregone benefits due to failing GES. Comparing business as usual scenario (BAU) state (in 2020) and GES. Since the BAU state has been assessed to be the same as the current state (2017), the same CoD in both scenarios. The estimate covers CoD in relation to the litter in the marine environment, including the litter on beach as well as litter in water (on the sea bottom, in water and biota). Indicator: National cost of degradation (foregone benefits) EUR/y. Data year: 2017. The estimate is based on data from a choice experiment study (based on national survey) implemented in Latvia in 2016-2017.
Cost of degradation: approach
Thematic
Thematic
Thematic
Thematic
Cost of degradation: type
Cost of degradation: results
National cost of degradation as foregone benefits due to failing GES in relation to the state of the marine biodiversity is at least 0.3 till 1.7 million EUR per year.
National cost of degradation as foregone benefits due to failing GES in relation to introduction of new invasive alien species is at least 1 till 2.8 million EUR per year (reflecting rather lower bound of the costs).
National cost of degradation as foregone benefits due to failing GES in relation to negative impacts of eutrophication on the marine water quality for recreation is at least 2.8 million EUR per year (with confidence interval 0.6-4.8 million EUR) reflecting rather lower bound of the costs.
National cost of degradation as foregone benefits due to failing GES in relation to the litter in the marine environment is 2.35 million EUR per year (with confidence interval 0.4-4.1 million EUR).
Related indicators
  • National foregone benefits EUR/y
  • National foregone benefits EUR/y.
  • National foregone benefits EUR/y.
  • National foregone benefits EUR/y.