Infaunal quality index - Marine online assessment tool

The target covering the area of benthic invertebrate communities at an acceptable condition has largely been achieved in the Celtic Seas Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region but has not been met for the Greater North Sea. Achievement of the target varies between UK biogeographic marine regions within each sub-region. There is low confidence in the assessment results.

Background

UK target on macrobenthic invertebrate quality

This indicator is used to assess progress against the Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2000) ecological status boundaries and areas of unacceptable impact, which are components of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (European Commission, 2008) sediment habitats targets set in the UK Marine Strategy Part One (HM Government, 2012).

Key pressures and impacts

Pressures likely to cause a water body to fail its environmental objectives for benthic invertebrates are those related to point source pollution containing substances such as metals and hydrocarbons, with additional impacts anticipated from certain physical disturbances. The UK Water Framework Directive risk assessments identify 52 of the 475 coastal water bodies as “At risk” or “Probably at risk” of failing to meet their Water Framework Directive objectives as a result of these pressures. Disturbance from aggregate extraction, commercial fishing, and contaminants from the oil and gas industry prevail in offshore habitats.

Measures taken to address the impacts

Measures to protect benthic habitats are set out in the UK Marine Strategy Part Three (HM Government, 2015). These include those taken under the Habitats Directive (European Council, 1992), Water Framework Directive River Basin Management Plans, Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (European Council, 1991), and the OSPAR Convention.

Monitoring, assessment and regional co-operation

Areas that have been assessed

Progress against the UK target was assessed for the Celtic Seas and Greater North Sea Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-regions and their constituent UK biogeographic marine regional seas set out in Charting Progress 2 (UKMMAS, 2010)

Monitoring and assessment methods

Assessments use data from monitoring associated with the Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2000), Habitats Directive (European Council, 1992), the Clean Seas Environmental Monitoring Programme, Marine Conservation Zones, UK Oil and Gas industry, and Regional Environmental Characterisation. The Infaunal Quality Index incorporates taxonomic diversity and evenness and proportions of sensitive and opportunistic taxa (each compared to minimally disturbed reference conditions) within macrobenthic invertebrate samples to derive an Ecological Quality Ratio.

Assessment thresholds

The indicator quality threshold is defined as the boundary for Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Status (Ecological Quality Ratio ≥ 0.64) or Good Ecological Potential (for Heavily Modified Water Bodies). For the Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-regions and the regional seas assessments, the overall indicator target is achieved where the assessed surface area (the total assessed surface area of inshore water bodies and offshore 10 km by 10 km assessment units) meeting the quality threshold achieves the quantity threshold of 85%.

Regional co-operation

The indicator has not been used for the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment (OSPAR Commission, 2017) but may be used for future regional analysis. The boundary of Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Status has been set through Intercalibration with other Member States of the North East Atlantic Geographical Intercalibration Group.

Assessment method

Further details on the Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index assessment method are available from the Water Framework Directive UK Technical Advisory Group.

Baseline setting

The approach to setting reference conditions as defined for the Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index is based on the characteristics of benthic infaunal assemblages from negligibly impacted sites as selected by expert judgement and modelled to estimate such characteristics for a range of sediment types and salinity. This is considered compliant with the approaches to setting baselines for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive as outlined by the OSPAR Intercessional Correspondence Group on the Coordination of Biodiversity Assessment and Monitoring: “a state in which the anthropogenic influences on species and habitats are considered to be negligible”.

Quality target

The target of “Good Ecological Status” as defined for the the Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2000) is being applied as the indicator quality threshold for the first round of Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessments. The quantity target is met where ≥ 85% of the assessed surface area within a Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region or UK regional sea meet the quality threshold. This conforms to the targets relating to quantity at an acceptable condition recommended by the UK Technical Advisory Group on the Water Framework Directive for Good Ecological Status. This may be reviewed and revised in future assessment cycles.

Aggregation approach

The approach to aggregating the Water Framework Directive water body classifications and additional offshore data for the assessment of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-regions and UK regional seas is as follows:

Infaunal Quality Index classification results for coastal waterbodies from the 2015 River Basin Management Plans were collated at the survey level from the UK monitoring authorities. The reference conditions for the Infaunal Quality Index were those as applied to the classifications from the River Basin Management Plans.
Offshore data was collated from multiple sources. The reference conditions applied are draft values derived to incorporate a greater representation of sediments from offshore samples.
Data density within inshore Water Framework Directive water bodies exceeds that from offshore locations. To reduce the potential for the assessments being biased towards reflecting inshore pressures which would arise from assessments being based on an average of the available data, the approach was modified to down-weight areas of high sample densities. This was undertaken by calculating the average Ecological Quality Ratio from samples within 10 km by 10 km assessment units.
The percentage of assessment units at each Water Framework Directive ecological status class were calculated within each Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region and UK regional sea.
Assessment units classified as ‘Bad,’ ‘Poor’, or ‘Moderate’ ecological status under the Water Framework Directive were categorised as being below the indicator quality target, with those at ‘Good’ or ‘High’ ecological status categorised as being above the indicator quality target.
The surface area assessed at above or below the indicator quality target is calculated as a percentage of the total assessed area for each Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region and UK regional sea.
The final assessment is based on the percentage of the surface area that meets the indicator quality target, measured against a quantity target threshold of 85%.

Confidence assessment

The approach to determining confidence in the Regional Seas assessments is based on the extent to which the indicator and associated assessments fulfil certain criteria which impact the extent to which the assessment represents the available habitat relevant to the indicator, the extent to which the indicator can identify the overall effect of the relevant pressures, and the confidence in the assessment result being above/below the indicator target. Details of the criteria are provided in Table 1.

Table 1. Confidence assessment criteria for the Charting Progress 2 (CP2) Regional Sea Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index indicator assessments. The overall confidence assessment is based on the lowest extent to which the criteria are fulfilled (known as: “one-out-all-out”).

Charting Progress 2 Regional Sea confidence assessment criteria	Low	Medium	High
Spatial coverage of classification data: This criterion indicates the extent to which Water Framework Directive water bodies within a Regional Sea are classified by the indicator. A high proportion of water bodies classified within a Regional Sea corresponds to high confidence in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment.	<33.3% of CP2 Regional Sea assessed	33.3% - 66.6% of CP2 Regional Sea assessed	>66.6% of CP2 Regional Sea assessed
Spatial coverage of pressures: This criterion provides a measure of the extent to which the classified Water Framework Directive water bodies correspond to the presence of relevant pressures (as determined through the Water Framework Directive risk assessments), indicating the potential of the Water Framework Directive classifications to detect the associated impacts of such pressures. A high coverage of the areas exposed to pressure such as those considered at risk of failing to achieve Good Ecological Status under the Water Framework Directive by the water body classifications corresponds to high confidence within the Regional Sea scale Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment.	<33.3% of ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ water bodies assessed	33.3% - 66.6% of ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ water bodies assessed	>66.6% of ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ water bodies assessed
Indicator level agreement (Cohen's Kappa) between assessment results and pressure from Risk Assessments: Cohen’s Kappa agreement indicates the extent to which the indicator Water Framework Directive classifications correspond to the risk assessments at the water body level. Agreement between water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ and those at Good Ecological Status is calculated using all water body data. High confidence in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessments corresponds to high agreement between the indicator classifications and risk assessment results. Low correspondence may be indicative of either low sensitivity of the indicator to the pressure or indicative of a low correspondence between the risk assessment results and the true extent of the pressure (further investigation recommended).	<0.333	0.333 - 0.666	>0.666
Variability of assessment results: This criterion is a measure of the variability of the different Water Framework Directive water body classifications within a Charting Progress 2 Regional Sea scale Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment. Low variability in the Water Framework Directive classifications corresponds with high confidence in the assessment.	<66.6% - of assessment units within same Water Framework Directive status	66.6% - 83.3% of assessment unit at same status	>83.3% of assessment units at same status
The proximity of assessment to target: This criterion is a measure of the extent of the difference between the observed measure of the quantity indicator and the quantity indicator target. Large differences between the observed quantity indicator value and the quantity indicator target corresponds to high confidence in the Charting Progress 2 Regional Sea scale Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment.	Broad-scale habitats: assessment within 5% of the target	Broad-scale habitats: assessment within 5% - 10% of the target	Broad-scale habitats: assessment >10% of the target

Deviations

The UK Water Framework Directive monitoring authorities applied the methods for assessment as described within the UK Technical Advisory Group method statement (WFD-UKTAG, 2014) with the following exception:

The classifications undertaken by The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs are based on the average Ecological Quality Ratio of a water body minus one Standard Deviation.

Results

Findings from the 2012 UK Initial Assessment

This indicator was not considered as part of the Initial Assessment (HM Government, 2012).

Latest findings

Status assessment

Assessments are based on aggregated water body classifications derived for the 2015 UK River Basin Management Plans and additional offshore data. The results of the aggregated Infaunal Quality Index assessment for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-regions and UK regional seas is presented in Figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1. Proportion of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) sub-region and Charting Progress 2 (CP2) Regional Sea benthic Infaunal Quality Index assessment areas meeting the indicator quality threshold, with corresponding assessment confidence.

Figure 2. Charting Progress 2 (CP2) Regional Seas with corresponding assessment results and locations of coastal water bodies used for the Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index (WFD WB IQI) classifications and offshore assessment grids with corresponding ecological status.

The overall indicator target may not have been achieved for the Greater North Sea sub-region, with a considerable proportion of its assessed area failing to meet the indicator quality target. While the Northern North Sea and Eastern English Channel UK Regional Seas have met the target, the surface area failing to meet the target predominantly within the Southern North Sea occurs at such an extent as to result in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region not meeting the overall target.

The overall target has largely been achieved within the Celtic Seas sub-region, with the majority of its assessed area meeting the quality target. The Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf and Shared Waters between Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland Regional Seas have met the quality threshold target for ≥ 85% of their assessed areas while this has not been met for the Western Channel and Celtic Seas and Irish Sea Regional Seas. The Atlantic North-West Approaches, Rockall Trough and Faeroe/Shetland Channel Regional Sea has not been assessed due to lack of data. In the Eastern English Channel, Scottish Continental Shelf and Shared Waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland Regional Seas, the quality target is met for 100% of the assessment units.

Low confidence has been assigned to all assessments, primarily due to the low spatial coverage of the Water Framework Directive assessments and low coverage of water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ from point source pollution pressures. Agreement between the Infaunal Quality Index assessment results and risk assessment results is low, indicating either a low correlation between the indicator to point source pollution pressures (either due to variability in the indicator or the criteria used for the risk assessments) or a discrepancy between the threshold required to trigger a water body being categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ and the quality target threshold.

Trend assessment

The trend is unknown: the aggregated Water Framework Directive results were not considered as part of the Initial Assessment (HM Government, 2012).

Further information

This first assessment is based on aggregated results from the classifications derived for the 2015 UK River Basin Management Plans (2009 to 2015 data for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, 2011 to 2015 data for Scotland) and additional offshore data for the 2009 to 2015 period. The method is based on intertidal and subtidal macrobenthic invertebrate assemblages and considered responsive to point source contaminants and certain physical disturbances.

The indicator determines the impact to the ecological quality of benthic macroinvertebrate communities of intertidal and subtidal habitats by combining measures of species diversity, proportions of sensitive and opportunistic taxa and taxonomic evenness. These measurements are compared to estimated minimally disturbed reference conditions with a weighted average of the three metrics used to derive the Ecological Quality Ratio. These are calculated for all viable samples within a Water Framework Directive water body throughout the six-year reporting period. The water body assessments indicate the average extent to which the water body deviates from reference conditions and relates this to the boundary between Moderate and Good Ecological Status (Ecological Quality Ratio ≥ 0.64, as set through Water Framework Directive intercalibration) to identify whether the water body has achieved the target of Good Ecological Status. The inshore water body Ecological Quality Ratio results are weighted according to water body surface area and combined with the offshore assessment grid results at the scale of Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region and Charting Progress 2 UK regional seas. The quantity target is met where ≥ 85% (broad scale habitat threshold) of the assessed surface area meets the quality target of Good or High Ecological Status.

Detailed assessment results for each Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region are presented for each of their component UK regional sea and summarized in Table 2. The sub-regions comprise of the regional seas as follows:

Table 2. Summary of inshore Water Framework Directive water body and offshore assessment results indicating surface area above and below the indicator quality threshold per UK Regional Sea as absolute values (km²) and as a percentage of each Regional Sea. Regions 1-3 are in the Greater North Sea Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region, while 4-9 are in the Celtic Seas Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region.

Regional Sea	Water Framework Directive water body surface area above quality target (km²)	Water Framework Directive water body surface area below quality target (km²)	Offshore assessment area above quality target (km²)	Offshore assessment areas below quality target (km²)	Surface area meeting quality target as % of the assessed area within the Regional Sea
01. Northern North Sea	1049.9	0.0	5,500	100	98.5%
02. Southern North Sea	1873.1	196.2	6,600	2,900	73.2%
03. Eastern English Channel	284.0	0.0	200	0	100.0%
04. Western Channel & Celtic Seas	2081.2	507.1	300	0	82.4%
05. Irish Sea	4719.1	1104.1	1,400	500	79.2%
06. Minches & Western Scotland	7615.4	488.6	0	0	94.0%
07. Scottish Continental Shelf	415.7	0.0	300	0	100.0%
09. Shared waters between N Ireland and Rep of Ireland	271.7	0.0	0	0	100.0%

Northern North Sea

The overall risk of the Northern North Sea failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as low. The majority of Water Framework Directive assessments within the Northern North Sea indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at Good Ecological Status (54% of assessment areas) with the remainder at High (with a low proportion of Moderate) Ecological Status (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Marine Strategy Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index assessment result, location, and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units for the Northern North Sea.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate no classified water bodies are categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining nine water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing. However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 67 water bodies, whereby a further 8 water bodies exist within the Northern North Sea which are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures that have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator. None of the water bodies assessed as below the indicator quality target are categorised as Heavily Modified Water Bodies, so meeting a target of Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential is not considered.

The overall confidence in the Northern North Sea Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is based on the low spatial coverage of the assessment data (9 out of 67 water bodies within the Regional Seas (Table 3)), the low spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point-source pollution pressures (none of the 8 water bodies) and the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057).

Table 3. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for the Northern North Sea.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Farne Islands to Newton Haven	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	14	0.65	Good
Holy Island and Budle Bay	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	30	0.81	High
Northumberland North	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	9	0.68	Good
Northumberland South	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	14	0.65	Good
Carnoustie to Fife Ness	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	10	0.68	Good
Firth of Forth Inner - Offshore	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	15	0.71	Good
Hilton of Cadboll to Whiteness Head	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	10	0.71	Good
Souter Head to Garron Point	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	10	0.79	High
The Keen to Isle of Noss	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably Not at Risk	15	0.74	Good

Southern North Sea

The overall risk of the Southern North Sea failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as high. The majority of assessments within the Southern North Sea indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at Good Ecological Status (60% of assessment areas) with the remainder at Moderate and High Ecological Status (Figure 4). Failure to achieve the indicator quantity target can be attributed to the offshore grid assessment results, where only 69.5% of the assessment areas meet the quality target. The surface area meeting the quality target for the inshore Water Framework Directive classifications is 90.5%.

Figure 4. Southern North Sea indicating Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations, and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate no classified water bodies are categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining 6 water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing. However, the UK Regional Seas intersects with a total of 13 water bodies, whereby a further 2 water bodies exist within the Southern North Sea which are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

When considering indicator quality targets for Heavily Modified Water Bodies (Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential), two of the water bodies (Lincolnshire and Whitstable Bay) assessed as below the indicator quality target are categorised as Heavily Modified Water Bodies, so meeting a target of Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential should be considered.

The overall confidence in the Southern North Sea Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is primarily based on the low spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point source pollution pressures (neither of the two water bodies within the Regional Sea), the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057). The confidence in the assessment is also reduced by the incomplete spatial coverage of the assessment data (6 out of 13 water bodies within the Southern North Sea Regional Sea (Table 4)).

Table 4. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for the Southern North Sea.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Blackwater Outer	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	23	0.69	Good
Essex	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	15	0.72	Good
Lincolnshire	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.58	Moderate
Norfolk North	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	17	0.65	Good
Wash Outer	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	58	0.65	Good
Whitstable Bay	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.63	Moderate

Eastern English Channel

The overall risk of the Eastern English Channel failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as low. All Water Framework Directive assessments within the Eastern English Channel indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at Good Ecological Status (74% of assessment areas) with the remainder at High Ecological Status (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations in the Eastern English Channel and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate no classified water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining two water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not not Risk’ of failing. However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 11 water bodies, yet no water bodies exist within the Eastern English Channel which are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

When considering indicator quality targets for Heavily Modified Water Bodies (Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential), none of the water bodies assessed as below the indicator quality target are categorised as Heavily Modified Water Bodies, so meeting a target of Good Ecological Potential is not considered.

The overall confidence in the Eastern English Channel Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is based on the low spatial coverage of the assessment data (2 out of 11 water bodies within the Regional Sea (Table 5)), the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057).

Table 5. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for the Eastern English Channel.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Solent	Environment Agency	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	33	0.67	Good
Tor Bay	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	94	0.76	High

Western Channel and Celtic Seas

The overall risk of the Western Channel and Celtic Seas failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as high. The majority of Water Framework Directive assessments within the Western Channel and Celtic Seas indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at Good Ecological Status (71% of assessment areas) with the remainder at Moderate and High Ecological Status (Figure 6). Failure to achieve the indicator quantity target can be attributed to the inshore Water Framework Directive classification results, where only 80.4% of the assessment areas meet the quality target. The extent meeting the quality target for the offshore grid assessments is 100%.

Figure 6. Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment result and location for the Western Channel and Celtic Seas Regional Sea and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate four water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining 13 water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing. However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 25 water bodies, whereby a further 2 water bodies exist within the Western Channel and Celtic Seas region are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

The overall confidence in the Western Channel and Celtic Seas Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is primarily based on the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057) and the proximity of the assessment results to the indicator target. The confidence in the assessment is also reduced by the incomplete spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point source pollution pressures (4 out of 6 water bodies within the Regional Sea (Table 6)).

Table 6. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for the Western Channel and Celtic Seas.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Bridgwater Bay	Environment Agency	No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	36	0.53	Moderate
Bristol Channel Inner South	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	15	0.57	Moderate
Carrick Roads Outer	Environment Agency	No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	25	0.69	Good
Cornwall North	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	53	0.87	High
Fal / Helford	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	18	0.73	Good
Lands End to Trevose Head	Environment Agency	No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	33	0.84	High
Lundy	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	11	0.67	Good
Penzance	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	8	0.67	Good
Plymouth Coast	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	7	0.69	Good
Plymouth Sound	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	33	0.70	Good
Salcombe Harbour	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	24	0.71	Good
Scilly Isles	Environment Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	99	0.66	Good
Burry Inlet Outer	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	145	0.63	Moderate
Carmarthen Bay	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	77	0.67	Good
Milford Haven Outer	Natural Resources Wales	No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	8	0.74	Good
Pembrokeshire South	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	20	0.68	Good
Swansea Bay	Natural Resources Wales	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	37	0.73	Good

Irish Sea

The overall risk of the Irish Sea failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as high. The majority of Water Framework Directive assessments within the Irish Sea indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at Good Ecological Status (56% of assessment areas) with the remainder at High and Moderate Ecological Status (Figure 7). Failure to achieve the indicator quantity target can be attributed to both inshore Water Framework Directive classification and offshore grid assessment results, with the extent below the quality target being 15.7% and 26.3% respectively.

Figure 7. Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations in the Irish Sea and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate 7 water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures. The remaining 20 water bodies are categorized as being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing. However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 64 water bodies, whereby a further 7 water bodies exist within the Irish Sea which are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

When considering indicator quality targets for Heavily Modified Water Bodies (Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential), 4 of the water bodies assessed as below the indicator quality target (Belfast Harbour, Conwy Bay, Holyhead Bay, and Mersey Mouth) are categorised as Heavily Modified Water Bodies, so meeting a target of Good Ecological Potential should be considered. This is of particular importance given the extent below the quality target for the Irish Sea (17.9%) is close to the quantity target (15%).

The overall confidence in the Irish Sea Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is primarily based on the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057), and the proximity of the assessment results to the indicator target. The confidence in the assessment is also reduced by the incomplete spatial coverage of the assessment data (27 out of 64 water bodies within the Irish Sea Regional Sea (Table 7) and the incomplete spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point source pollution pressures (7 out of 14 water bodies within the Regional Sea).

Table 7. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for the Irish Sea. Where Ecological Status includes *, the water body ecological quality ratios and associated ecological status for the Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs classifications differ to those from other agencies due to a modification in the approach to calculating the reported values.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Ards Peninsula	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	-	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	25	0.80*	High*
Belfast Harbour	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	20	0.64*	Moderate*
Belfast Lough Inner	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	46	0.75*	Good*
Belfast Lough Outer	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	74	0.75*	Good*
Dundrum Bay Outer	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	-	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	18	0.70*	Good*
Larne Lough Mid	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	20	0.72*	Good*
North Channel	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	12	0.75*	Good*
Strangford Lough North	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	29	0.61*	Moderate*
Strangford Lough South	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	3	0.76*	High*
Cumbria	Environment Agency	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	31	0.70	Good
Mersey Mouth	Environment Agency	Yes	At Risk/Probably at Risk	40	0.62	Moderate
Solway Outer South	Environment Agency	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	7	0.61	Moderate
Anglesey North	Natural Resources Wales	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	83	0.70	Good
Caernarfon Bay South	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	8	0.57	Moderate
Cardigan Bay Central	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.69	Good
Cardigan Bay North	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	25	0.71	Good
Conwy Bay	Natural Resources Wales	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	69	0.60	Moderate
Holyhead Bay	Natural Resources Wales	Yes	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	20	0.62	Moderate
Menai Strait	Natural Resources Wales	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	35	0.72	Good
Tremadog Bay	Natural Resources Wales	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	86	0.78	High
Balcary Point to Kirkcudbright Bay	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.84	High
Firth of Clyde Inner - Dunoon and Wemyss Bay	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.69	Good
Firth of Clyde Middle - Offshore	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	5	0.66	Good
Firth of Clyde Outer (offshore)	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.70	Good
Girvan	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.73	Good
Loch Fyne - Middle Basin	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.66	Good
Loch Ryan	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	At Risk/Probably at Risk	5	0.76	High

Minches and Western Scotland

The overall risk of the Minches and Western Scotland Regional Sea failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as low. The majority of Water Framework Directive assessments within the Regional Sea indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at High Ecological Status (60% of assessment areas) with the remainder at Good (with a low proportion of Moderate) Ecological Status (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations for the Minches and Western Scotland Regional Sea, and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directives water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate 2 water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining 7 water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing. However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 178 water bodies, whereby a further 10 water bodies exist within the Minches and Western Scotland Regional Sea. These are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

The overall confidence in the Minches and Western Scotland Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is based on the low spatial coverage of the assessment data (9 out of 178 water bodies within the Regional Sea (Table 8)), the low spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point source pollution pressures (2 out of 12 water bodies within the Regional Sea ), and the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057).

Table 8. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for Minches and Western Scotland. Where Ecological Status includes *, the water body ecological quality ratios and associated ecological status for the Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs classifications differ to those from other agencies due to a modification in the approach to calculating the reported values.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body		Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
North Coast	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	15	0.60*	Moderate*
Rathlin Island	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	13	0.82*	High*
Loch Erisort	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.79	High
Loch Ewe	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	10	0.71	Good
Loch Linnhe (South)	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.66	Good
Loch Sunart	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	20	0.72	Good
Loch Sween	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.68	Good
Sea of the Hebrides	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	15	0.76	High
Sound of Jura South	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	5	0.60	Moderate
The Minch North	Scottish Environment Protection Agency		No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	15	0.71	Good

Scottish Continental Shelf

The overall risk of the Scottish Continental Shelf Regional Sea failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as low. All Water Framework Directive assessments within the Scottish Continental Shelf indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being at Good Ecological Status (100% of assessment areas) (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Scottish Continental Shelf Regional Sea indicating Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate a single water body categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining 3 water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘Probably not at Risk’ of failing (Table 9). However, the Regional Sea intersects with a total of 90 water bodies, whereby a further 7 water bodies exist within the Scottish Continental Shelf which are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

When considering indicator quality targets for Heavily Modified Water Bodies (Water Framework Directive Good Ecological Potential), none of the water bodies assessed as below the indicator quality target are categorised as Heavily Modified Water Bodies so meeting a target of Good Ecological Potential is not considered.

The overall confidence in the Scottish Continental Shelf Regional Sea Infaunal Quality Index assessment is categorised as low. This is based on the low spatial coverage of the assessment data (4 out of 90 water bodies within the Regional Sea), the low spatial coverage of 'At Risk' or 'Probably at Risk' water bodies in terms of point source pollution pressures (one out of 8 water bodies within the Regional Sea), and the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057).

Table 9. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for Scottish Continental Shelf.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Kirkwall	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.75	Good
Loch Roag	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.68	Good
Olna Firth	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	10	0.69	Good
Scapa Flow	Scottish Environment Protection Agency	No	At Risk / Probably at Risk	10	0.74	Good

Shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland

The overall risk of the shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland failing to meet the target for Infaunal Quality Index can be considered as low. The majority of Water Framework Directive assessments within the shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland indicate that Infaunal Quality Index communities are above the indicator quality target, being predominantly at High Ecological Status (46% of assessment areas) with the remainder at Good and Moderate Ecological Status (Figure 10).

Figure 10. Shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland indicating Infaunal Quality Index Marine Strategy Framework Directive assessment results and locations and ecological status of the corresponding Water Framework Directive water bodies and offshore assessment units.

The corresponding risk assessments for the water bodies indicate no classified water bodies categorised as ‘At Risk’ or ‘Probably at Risk’ of failing to achieve the indicator quality target as a result of point source pollution pressures, with the remaining 3 water bodies being ‘Not at Risk’ or ‘’Probably not at Risk’ of failing (Table 10). However, the region intersects with a total of 3 water bodies, yet no water bodies exist within the shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. These are considered 'At Risk' from point source pollution pressures which have not been assessed with the Infaunal Quality Index indicator.

The overall confidence in the Infaunal Quality Index assessment for the shared waters between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is categorised as low. This is based on the low correspondence between the Infaunal Quality Index indicator and point source pollution pressures (Kappa agreement of 0.057), and the proximity of the assessment results to the indicator target.

Table 10. Summary of Water Framework Directive water body pressure information and Water Framework Directive Infaunal Quality Index classification results for shared waters between Northern Ireland the Republic of Ireland. Where Ecological Status includes *, the water body ecological quality ratios and associated ecological status for the Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs classifications differ to those from other agencies due to a modification in the approach to calculating the reported values.

Water body name	Monitoring Agency	Heavily Modified Water Body	Point Source Pollution Pressure	Number of samples	Water body Ecological Quality Ratio	Water Framework Directive Ecological Status
Carlingford Lough	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	38	0.65*	Good*
Lough Foyle	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	-	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	24	0.74*	Good*
Mourne Coast	Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs	No	Not at Risk / Probably not at Risk	18	0.65*	Good*

Conclusions

The target for benthic invertebrate communities has been largely met in some parts of the Celtic Seas Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region, but not for the Greater North Sea Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region, although confidence in the assessment is low.

The indicator target has been met for 5 of the 8 assessed UK Regional Seas set out in Charting Progress 2 (UKMMAS, 2010), but not for the remaining 3 where degradation of the benthic invertebrate communities may have occurred. The pressures which impact the benthic communities operate over small spatial scales with their effect being relatively localised. Assessment of the indicator at the Regional Sea scale may, therefore, be considered of greater relevance.

Failure of the Southern North Sea to meet the indicator target is driven by the offshore results. The Western Channel and Celtic Seas region is failing to achieve the indicator target, driven by the Water Framework Directive classification results. The Irish Sea is failing to achieve the indicator target, driven by both Water Framework Directive classifications and offshore results. Differences between inshore and offshore results may indicate the level to which different pressures are impacting macrobenthic invertebrate communities. The results reflect the overall achievement of targets within the assessment period and are unable to provide directional trends. Identification of directional trends requires subsequent benthic macrobenthic invertebrate assessments.

Additional data, tool development and validation, are needed to confirm the failures with a detailed investigation of the benthic communities and corresponding inshore and offshore pressures required before any reasons for failures can be proposed.

The results may inform data collection and research requirements to improve the confidence and accuracy of future assessments.

Knowledge gaps

From the current results, it is not possible to provide a full assessment of the target throughout UK waters because of the following gaps:

The assessments represent a small proportion of the overall UK coastline with Water Framework Directive assessments provided for 79 out of 475 (17%) coastal water bodies.
Considerable offshore areas of each Marine Strategy Framework Directive sub-region and component UK Regional Seas have not been assessed.
Offshore pressures have not been quantified within the current assessments.
Reference conditions need to be refined, in particular for the offshore areas, to ensure the incorporation of variability relating to changes in depth or any potential biogeographical trends.

References

HM Government (2012) ‘Marine Strategy Part One: UK Initial Assessment and Good Environmental Status’ (viewed on 5 July 2018)

HM Government (2015) ‘Marine Strategy Part Three: UK Programme of Measures’ December 2015. (viewed on 5 July 2018)

European Council (1991) ‘Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment’ Official Journal of the European Union L 135, 30.5.1991, pages 40–52 (viewed on 27 November 2018)

European Council (1992) ‘Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora’ Official Journal of the European Union L 206, 22.7.1992, pages 7-50 (viewed 1 October 2018)

European Commission (2000) ‘Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy’ Official Journal of the European Union L 327, 22.12.2000, pages 1–73 (viewed on 8 October 2018)

European Commission (2008) ‘Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)’ Official Journal of the European Union L 164, 25.6.2008, pages 19-40 (viewed 21 September 2018)

OSPAR Commission (2017) ‘Intermediate Assessment 2017’ (viewed on 21 September 2018)

WFD-UKTAG (Water Framework Directive UK Technical Advisory Group) (2014) ‘UKTAG Transitional and Coastal Water Assessment Method Benthic Invertebrate Fauna Infaunal Quality Index’ April 2014, ISBN: 978-1-906934-34-7 (viewed on 27 November 2018)

UKMMAS (2010) 'Charting Progress 2: An assessment of the state of the UK seas' Published by Defra on behalf of the UK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy community

Phillips GR, Anwar A, Brooks L, Martina LJ, Miles AC Prior A (2014) ‘Infaunal quality index: Water Framework directive classification scheme for marine benthic invertebrates – Report’ SC080016, Environment Agency (viewed on 30 April 2019)

Water framework Directive Infaunal Quality index (Phillips and others, 2014)

OSPAR Commission (2012) ‘MSFD Advice Manual and Background Document on Biodiversity, A living document – Version 3.2 of 5 March 2012, Approaches to determining good environmental status , setting of environmental targets and selecting indicators for Marne Strategy Framework Directive descriptors 1,2,4 and 6’ OSPAR Publication 581/2012, ISBN 978 -1 – 909159-14-3 (viewed on 30 April 2019)

Acknowledgements

Assessment metadata

Assessment Type	UK Marine Strategy Framework Directive Indicator Assessment
	D1 - Biological Diversity D6 – Seafloor Integrity
	Condition of soft sediment invertebrate communities in coastal waters determined using Water Framework Directive methods
	Please see links provided in ‘References’ section above.
Point of contact email	marinestrategy@defra.gov.uk
Metadata date	Friday, June 1, 2018
Title	Condition of soft sediment invertebrate communities in coastal waters determined using Water Framework Directive methods
Resource abstract	Marine Strategy Framework Directive Regional Seas were assessed using aggregated Water Framework Directive classification results for the benthic invertebrate Infaunal Quality Index indicator as undertaken for the UK Cycle 2 River Basin Management Plans. Marine Strategy Framework Directive environmental objective targets were set according to WFD quality targets and UK Technical Advisory Group spatial criteria and favourable condition assessment thresholds. The target covering the area of benthic invertebrate communities at an acceptable condition has largely been achieved in the Celtic Sea Marine Strategy Framework Directive Sub-Region but has not been met for the Greater North Sea.
Linkage	In addition to references provided in above: HM Government (2015) ‘The Water Framework Directive (Standards and Classification) Directions (England and Wales) 2015’ (viewed on 13 January 2019) HM Government (2015) ‘The Water Framework Directive (Classification, Priority Substances and Shellfish Waters) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015’ (viewed on 13 January 2019) Scottish Government (2014) ‘The Scotland River Basin District (Standards) Directions 2014’ (viewed on 13 January 2019) Phillips GR, Anwar A, Brooks L, Martina LJ, Miles AC, Prior A ‘Infaunal quality index: Water Framework Directive classification scheme for marine benthic invertebrates’ Evidence, Environment Agency Report SC080016 (viewed on 13 January 2019) Water Framework Directive Cycle 2 River Basin Management Plans: England Northern Ireland Scotland Wales
Conditions applying to access and use	© Crown copyright, licenced under the Open Government Licence (OGL). Conditions to the Oil & Gas UK Open Licence: https://oilandgasuk.co.uk/terms-and-conditions/ Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund (MALSF) Regional Environmental Characterisation Data was made available under the terms of use for Open Government Licence, subject to the following acknowledgement: Contains Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund materials copyright Crown Copyright 2009.
Assessment Lineage	Background: This indicator is used to assess progress against the Water Framework Directive ecological status boundaries and areas of unacceptable impact which are components of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive sediment habitats targets set in the UK Marine Strategy Part One. The infaunal quality index incorporates taxonomic diversity and evenness and proportions of sensitive and opportunistic taxa (each compared to minimally disturbed reference conditions) within macrobenthic invertebrate samples to derive an Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR). The indicator quality threshold is defined as the boundary for WFD Good Ecological Status (EQR ≥0.64) or Good Ecological Potential (for Heavily Modified Water Bodies [HMWBs]). For Marine Strategy Framework Directive Sub-Region and CP2 Regional Sea assessments, the overall indicator target is achieved where the assessed surface area (the total assessed surface area of inshore water bodies and offshore 10km x 10km assessment units) meeting the quality threshold achieves the quantity threshold of 85%. Sources of data: Assessments use data from WFD monitoring used within the Cycle 2 River Basin Management Plans for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, Habitats Directive, Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ), Disposal Ground Monitoring (Northern Ireland), Fishing Intensity Study, Thames London Gateway, UK Oil and Gas industry and Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund (MALSF) Regional Environmental Characterisation (REC) monitoring. Data processing: The Infaunal Quality Index calculated for the Cycle 2 River Basin Management Plans used for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive UK assessment can be calculated using the infaunal quality index Microsoft Excel workbook (available for download from UKTAG) The approach to aggregating the WFD water body classifications and additional offshore data for the assessment of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive Sub-Regions and UK Charting Progress 2 (CP2) Regional Seas is as follows: Infaunal Quality Index WFD classification results for coastal waterbodies from the Cycle 2 River Basin Management Plan (RBMPs) were collated at the survey level from the UK WFD monitoring authorities. The reference conditions for the infaunal quality index were those as applied to the classifications from the River Basin Management Plans. Offshore data was collated from multiple sources (see metadata section). The reference conditions applied are draft values derived to incorporate a greater representation of sediments from offshore samples. Data density within inshore WFD water bodies exceeds that from offshore locations. To reduce potential for the assessments being biased towards reflecting inshore pressures which would arise from assessments being based on an average of the available data, the approach was modified to down-weight areas of high sample densities. This was undertaken by calculating the average EQR from samples within 10km x 10km assessment units. The percentage of assessment units at each WFD ecological status class were calculated within each Marine Strategy Framework Directive Sub-Region and CP2 Regional Sea. Assessment units classified as ‘Bad’, ‘Poor’ or ‘Moderate’ ecological status under WFD were categorised as being below the indicator quality target, with those at ‘Good’ or ‘High’ ecological status categorised as being above the indicator quality target. The surface area assessed at above/below the indicator quality target is calculated as a percentage of the total assessed area for each Marine Strategy Framework Directive Sub-Region and CP2 Regional Sea. The final assessment is based on the percentage of the surface area that meets the indicator quality target, measured against a quantity target threshold of 85%.
Indicator assessment results
Dataset metadata	https://www.dassh.ac.uk/doitool/data/1665
Links to datasets identifiers	Please, see below
Dataset DOI	https://doi.org/10.17031/1665

The Metadata are “data about the content, quality, condition, and other characteristics of data” (FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata Workbook, Ver 2.0, May 1, 2000).

Metadata definitions

Assessment Lineage - description of data sets and method used to obtain the results of the assessment

Dataset – The datasets included in the assessment should be accessible, and reflect the exact copies or versions of the data used in the assessment. This means that if extracts from existing data were modified, filtered, or otherwise altered, then the modified data should be separately accessible, and described by metadata (acknowledging the originators of the raw data).

Dataset metadata – information on the data sources and characteristics of data sets used in the assessment (MEDIN and INSPIRE compliance).

Digital Object Identifier (DOI) – a persistent identifier to provide a link to a dataset (or other resource) on digital networks. Please note that persistent identifiers can be created/minted, even if a dataset is not directly available online.

Indicator assessment metadata – data and information about the content, quality, condition, and other characteristics of an indicator assessment.

MEDIN discovery metadata - a list of standardized information that accompanies a marine dataset and allows other people to find out what the dataset contains, where it was collected and how they can get hold of it.