MS/Art8/2018/D10/France/NE Atlantic: Celtic Seas — Marine Information System for Europe

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D10 / France / NE Atlantic: Celtic Seas

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D10 Litter
Member State	France
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Celtic Seas
Reported by	Ministère de la transition Ecologique et Solidaire
Report date	2020-02-19
Report access	ART8_GES_FR_2020-02-17.xml

SRM MC (ACS-FR-MS-MC)

Simplified table

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
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	Micro-litter in the environment	Micro-litter in the environment	Litter and micro-litter in species	Litter and micro-litter in species
Element	Artificial polymer materials	Artificial polymer materials	Ceramics/pottery	Chemicals	Cloth	Cloth/textile	Food waste	Glass	Glass/ceramics	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Litter in the environment	Machined wood	Medical waste	Metal	Metal	Metal	Paper/cardboard	Paper/cardboard	Plastic/polystyrene	Processed/worked wood	Rubber	Rubber	Sanitary waste	Undefined	Undefined	Micro-litter - Artificial polymer materials	Micro-litter - Other	Artificial polymer materials	Other litter/ micro-litter
Element code	ARTPOLY	ARTPOLY	Pottery.OSPAR-Beach	CHEM	Cloth.OSPAR-Beach	TEXTILE	FOOD	Glass.OSPAR-Beach	GLASS	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	PresEnvLitter	Wood.OSPAR-Beach	Medical.OSPAR-Beach	METAL	METAL	Metal.OSPAR-Beach	PAPER	Paper.OSPAR-Beach	Plastic.OSPAR-Beach	WOOD	RUBBER	Rubber.OSPAR-Beach	Sanitary.OSPAR-Beach	UNDEF	UNDEF	MicrolitterArtPoly	MicrolitterOther	ARTPOLY	LitterOther
Element code source	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	OSPAR	OSPAR	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU
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	D10C2	D10C2	D10C3	D10C3
Parameter	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed		Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Other	Other	Other	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface	Amount on coastline		Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on water surface	Amount on seabed	Amount on coastline	Amount on coastline	Amount on seabed	Amount on water surface
Parameter other										Trend in sediment (coastline)	Trend in sediment (seabed)	Trend in water
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Achievement of the parameter is defined as a significant decrease (Kendall's correlation coefficient and Kruskall-Wallis test) in the number of wastes observed (all categories).	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet		Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet	Not available yet
Threshold value source										Other (specify)	Other (specify)	Other (specify)
Threshold value source other										National	National	National
Value achieved upper	84.14	0.16	2.0	0.03	9.0			18.0	3.17				52.5	3.5	1.95		7.0		83.0	723.0	0.07	1.03	5.0	14.0	3.22	0.23
Value achieved lower	31.27												1.0				0.5			164.0			1.0
Value unit	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	number of items per square kilometre		Other	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other		Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre	Other	Other	number of items per square kilometre	number of items per square kilometre
Value unit other			items/100m		items/100m			items/100m		no unit	no unit	no unit	items/100m	items/100m			items/100m		items/100m	items/100m			items/100m	items/100m
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	No	No	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown		Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description parameter	Le paramètre "Quantité (nombre) sur les fonds marins" est calculé à partir des opérations de chalutage réalisée à bord des navires lors des campagnes halieutiques. Les déchets récupérés au cours des opérations de chalutage sont catégorisés, dénombrés et pesés. L'unité est un nombre d'unités (déchets) par kilomètre carré et la métrique est une quantité moyenne annuelle (minimum et maximum) de déchets pour la catégorie de déchets considérée . Cependant, en l'absence de seuil, l'atteinte ou non du paramètre n'a pas pu être évaluée. A noter que certaines catégories de déchets issues des différents protocoles de collecte de déchets sur le fond ont dû être additionnées pour pouvoir correspondre aux catégories de la décision 2017/848/EU. C'est le cas pour la catégorie de la décision "Matériaux polymères artificiels" qui regroupe les catégories "Plastique" et "Déchet sanitaire".	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)" is based on the analysis of the trend, per collection site, of the total quantities of waste on the shoreline (all waste categories) over the reporting period (2011-2017) by the software "Litter Analyst". To assess the achievement of this parameter, a target of 10 sites per MRU was set in order to constitute a national network. This target has not yet been achieved. In the absence of a threshold and due to a generally too limited amount of data, this parameter could not be evaluated.	The parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is based on the analysis of the trend in total quantities of waste on the seabed (all categories of waste) over the period considered (2012-2016) using non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of waste on the seabed (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly negative). Thus, the parameter "Trend in sediment (seabed)" is not reached in the Celtic Seas sub-region.	The parameter "Trend in water" is based on the analysis of the trend of the total quantities of floating waste (all waste categories) over the period considered (2010-2016) by non-parametric tests (Kendall correlation and Kruskall-Wallis test). The study of the total quantities of waste per km2 and the statistical tests carried out show that there is no significant decrease in the quantities of floating waste for the period 2010-2016 (Kendall's correlation coefficient not significantly positive) . Thus, the parameter "Trend in water" is not reached in the Celtic Seas marine sub-region.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.		The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category concerned. However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" represents a number of units (waste) per 100 metres of beach. For the waste category under consideration, the metric is a median (minimum and maximum) quantity of waste for each collection site over the period 2011-2017. In the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the metric was met.	The parameter 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' shall be calculated from the trawling operations carried out on board vessels during fishing trips. Waste recovered during trawling operations shall be categorised, counted and weighed. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories of waste from the different waste collection protocols on the substance had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the decision category "Not defined", which includes the "Miscellaneous", "Unspecified" and "Natural Product" categories. The category "Natural Product" includes the sub-categories "Processed Wood", "Paper/Cardboard" and "Rope".	The parameter "Quantity (number) in water" is calculated from the observation of floating waste on board vessels during fishing trips. The unit is a number of units (waste) per square kilometre and the metric is an annual average quantity (minimum and maximum) of waste for the waste category in question . However, in the absence of a threshold, it was not possible to assess whether or not the parameter was met. It should be noted that certain categories from the various floating waste collection protocols had to be added together to correspond to the categories of Decision 2017/848/EU. This is the case for the Decision category "Not defined" which includes the categories "fisheries waste", "small waste" and "Unspecified".
Related indicator	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur le littoral		Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets flottants	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur le littoral	Déchets sur les fonds marins	Déchets flottants
Criteria status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Artificial polymeric materials. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is in progress at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Ceramics/pottery. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met or not does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Chemicals (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Textile. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Fabric/textile (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, development is underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Glass. In parallel, developments are under way to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters for quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category glass/ceramic (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The TG ML (Technical Group on Marine Litter) has so far not been able to define usable thresholds for criterion D10C1 - however this work is ongoing and will be operational in the next evaluation cycle. In the general absence of agreed thresholds or baselines in EU Member States for each waste category, the assessment is based on statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all categories). The three parameters evaluated are "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)". However, at present, no integration rule between these three parameters has been established, which does not allow to conclude on criterion D10C1. However, the results show for floating and bottom litter no significant decrease in the number of litters over the evaluated period: the parameters "Trend in water" and "Trend in sediment (seabed)" are therefore not met. The parameter "Trend in sediment (shoreline)", on the other hand, could not be assessed due to insufficient data.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Machined wood. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is not sufficient to conclude on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Medical waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters for the floating waste and the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, no rules are currently defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires the continuation of the work that is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Metal. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.		The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Paper/board. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" has been reached does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Plastic/Polystyrene. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the HHWW and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameter for floating waste is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Processed/worked wood (category not assessed for waste on the merits). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste quantities to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter is met on the merits does not allow a conclusion on the status of the D10C1 criterion for the waste category Rubber (category not assessed for floating waste). In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of coastal, floating and bottom waste quantities to be integrated by category for the next assessment.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the waste parameter "Quantity (number) on shore" is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Rubber. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories with the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of amount of waste on shore, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The absence of a conclusion on whether the parameter for waste on the shoreline, "Quantity (number) on the shoreline", is met does not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category sanitary waste. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD and OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters of quantities of waste on the shoreline, floating waste and bottom waste to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.	The lack of a conclusion on whether the parameters for floating waste and on the substance do not allow a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 for the waste category Not defined. In addition, there are currently no rules defined to incorporate the two parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed". The integration within criterion D10C1 of the results of each parameter is not yet operational and requires further work which is ongoing at the level of the TG ML working group. In addition, developments are underway to harmonise the MSFD categories and the OSPAR categories, which will allow the three parameters relating to quantities of litter on the shoreline, floating litter and litter on the bottom to be integrated for the next assessment by category.
Element status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description element	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Artificial polymeric materials". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the seabed"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been affected makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Ceramics/pottery". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Chemicals". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Textile" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Fabric/textile". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Glass" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Glass/ceramic". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The lack of a conclusion on the status of criterion D10C1 does not allow a conclusion on the status of the element "Waste in the environment (excluding micro-waste)". This element has been added in order to be able to perform a statistical analysis of trends in the number of wastes observed (all waste categories). The results in terms of the parameters assessed for this element show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes observed (floating and bottom), but rather an increasing trend in this MRU for floating wastes. It should be noted that the source of the code for this element comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion as to whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Machined wood" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the "Medical waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Metal". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Metal" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code because there is no official reference for the main categories from the OSPAR protocols.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the shoreline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Paper/board" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Plastics/polystyrene". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the element code is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the status of criterion D10C1, let alone the status of the element "Processed/worked wood". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters 'Quantity (number) in water' and 'Quantity (number) on the seabed' are met does not allow the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the 'Rubber' element, to be assessed. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coast" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Rubber". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameter "Quantity (number) on the coastline" has been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the "Sanitary waste" element. Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of waste on the coast, the OSPAR categories were retained because they allowed long time series (about 10 years of data) and the use of the statistical analysis tool "Litter Analyst", which is only suitable for the OSPAR list for the time being. It should be noted that the code for the element is a national code due to the lack of an official reference system for the main categories derived from the OSPAR protocols.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The absence of a conclusion on whether or not the parameters "Quantity (number) in water" and "Quantity (number) on the seabed" have been reached makes it impossible to assess the state of criterion D10C1, let alone the state of the element "Not defined". Furthermore, it was not possible for this assessment to have a common list of waste categories between the three indicators selected ("waste on the shore", "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom"). In the case of floating waste and waste on the seabed, the categories listed in Decision 2017/848/EU have been retained. Thus, a correspondence was made between the categories used by the different waste collection protocols and those resulting from the Decision. It should be noted that the source of the element code is from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.	The source of the element code comes from the European Environment Agency.
Integration rule type parameter	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Integration rule description parameter	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.	Methods for integrating the parameters for assessing the status of the D10C1 criterion will be discussed at the European level during the next MSFD assessment cycle.
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
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES 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	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	The results obtained for the French part of the Celtic Seas marine sub-region show that the assessment of GES achievement for descriptor D10- Marine Waste requires further methodological developments (protocols or indicators) and data acquisition. Criterion D10C1 could not be assessed in its entirety due to the lack of thresholds and insufficient data for the indicator "waste on the coast". However, the indicators for "floating waste" and "waste on the bottom" show that there is no significant decrease in the number of wastes over the assessment period. The overall results also indicate that waste is predominantly plastics and that fishing activities are an important source of waste. Despite the acquisition of many better structured data since the initial 2012 assessment, methodological developments (protocols, types of integration, thresholds or indicators) and the acquisition of additional data are necessary.	En raison du manque de données concernant les micro-déchets flottants et de l'absence d'indicateurs opérationnels pour les micro-déchets sur le littoral et dans les sédiments, le critère D10C2 n’a pas pu être évalué pour la partie française de la sous-région marine Mers celtiques.	En raison du manque de données concernant les micro-déchets flottants et de l'absence d'indicateurs opérationnels pour les micro-déchets sur le littoral et dans les sédiments, le critère D10C2 n’a pas pu être évalué pour la partie française de la sous-région marine Mers celtiques.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.	Criterion D10C3 could not be assessed due to lack of data and the absence of a threshold for the indicator on waste ingested by marine turtles.
Assessments period	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016	2010-2016
Related pressures
Related targets