Table 2.
Country-wise overview of Quality Elements used in the various types of assessments
| Assessment type | Phyto | SAV/PB | BI | Fish | Supp | Level of integration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denmark | ||||||
| Lakes (WFD) | + | − | − | − | − | No integration (based on single indicator) |
| Rivers (WFD) | − | +/− | +* | − | − | Integration within BQE |
| Coastal (WFD) | + | + | − | − | − | A mix of 1, 2 or 3 indicators/BQEs |
| MSFD | +* | +* | +* | − | − | Integrated assessment |
| OSPAR/HELCOM | +* | +* | +* | − | +* | Integrated assessment |
| Finland | ||||||
| Lakes (WFD) | + | +/+ | +1 | + | + | Integrated assessment |
| Rivers (WFD) | − | −/+ | + | + | + | Integrated assessment |
| Coastal (WFD) | +- | +*− | +*− | − | + | Integrated assessment |
| MSFD | + | − | + | − | + | Integrated assessment |
| HELCOM | +* | − | +* | − | +* | Integrated assessment |
| Norway | ||||||
| Lakes (WFD) | + | + | + | + | − | Integrated assessment |
| Rivers (WFD) | − | −/+ | + | + | + | Integrated assessment |
| Coastal (WFD) | + | +/− | + | − | + | Integrated assessment |
| OSPAR | +* | + | +* | − | +* | Integrated assessment |
| Sweden | ||||||
| Lakes (WFD) | + | + | + | + | − | Integrated assessment |
| Rivers (WFD) | − | −/+ | + | + | + | Integrated assessment |
| Coastal (WFD) | +* | + | + | − | + | Integration within BQE |
| MSFD | + | − | + | − | + | Integrated assessment |
| OSPAR/HELCOM | +* | + | +* | − | +* | Integrated assessment |
A plus (+) indicates use of the QE, while a minus (−) indicates that the QE is not currently used. An asterisk indicates that multiple indicators or indices are being applied—no asterisk indicates that only a single indicator has been applied per group or BQE
WFD Water Framework Directive, MSFD Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Phyto phytoplankton, SAV submerged aquatic vegetation, PB phytobenthos, BI benthic invertebrates, Supp supporting indicators, e.g. nutrients, oxygen and Secchi depth
1 Both littoral and profundal