16
NATURA Number 38 | June 2015 Nature and Biodiversity Newsletter 2000 Environment The State of Nature in the EU ISSN 12443-7727
1 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
NATURAN u m b e r 3 8 | J u n e 2 0 1 5N a t u r e a n d B i o d i v e r s i t y N e w s l e t t e r
2000
Environment
The State of Nature in the EU
ISSN
124
43-7
727
2 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
In this issue of the newsletter, we present some key findings from our new report on the State of Nature in the EU. The report assesses the conservation status and trends of some 2,000 species and natural habitats protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives. In a nutshell, the report shows that while there are important success stories in the recovery of nature, especially where there have been targeted conservation actions, the overall status of species and habitats in the EU has not significantly improved over the last six years. But nature is relatively slow to adapt to change, and six years is too short a timeframe to reasonably expect any significant improvements. It is already clear however, that we need to step-up our efforts considerably if we are to achieve the targets set in the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy. The coming mid-term review of the Strategy will be a further opportunity to renew momentum and reinforce commitments for the period up to 2020. Much has been achieved since the Strategy was adopted in 2011. Two recent causes for celebration are the entry into force of the new Regulation on Invasive Alien Species, which addresses a major driver of biodiversity loss, and the launch of the Natural Capital Financing Facility (NCFF) earlier this year, which will provide innovative financial solutions to further promote the conservation, restoration, management and enhancement of our natural capital, ecosystem services and climate adaptation. The State of Nature report will also provide important input to the Fitness Check of the Birds and Habitats Directives, now well underway. The Fitness Check will draw on extensive evidence gathered from a range of different stakeholder groups, as well as from the results of a public consultation that was launched at the end of April: if you haven’t taken part yet, I would strongly encourage you to do so. This evidence should help us understand what’s working, what isn’t, and why. We can then identify opportunities for improving implementation, and reduce any unnecessary administrative burden that may become apparent. Nature and biodiversity provide essential ecosystem services that underpin economic growth, and they need legislation that is fit for purpose. Our intention is to ensure that our legislative framework works well in practice and achieves its objectives efficiently and effectively. I am confident that the outcome of the Fitness Check will provide a solid and informed basis for any future policy considerations. In the meantime, we have good cause to celebrate all that has been achieved to date and to recognise the tremendous efforts made by different sectors of society in turning Natura 2000 into a Europe-wide success story. The Natura 2000 Awards are designed specifically with this in mind, and I am pleased to be able to announce this year’s winners in the newsletter below.
Karmenu VellaEuropean Commissioner for Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Natura2000nature and biodiversity newsletter June 2015
CONTENTS3–7 The State of Nature in the EU
8–9 Natura 2000 Barometer – update 2014
10–11Winners of the 2015 Natura 2000 Awards
12–13The Natural Capital Financing Facility
14–16 News Round-up
Cover: Pair of European Bee-eater, Merops apiaster, Alentejo, Portugal. © Roger Powell / naturepl.com
Editorial
2©
European Comm
ission natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
© M
att Brazier / Environment Agency
© Alex H
yde / naturepl.com
© Phil Savoie / naturepl.com
© European Com
mission
© Terry W
hittaker / naturepl.com
3 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 3 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 33
The State of Nature in the EU
Reporting under the
EU Habitats and Birds Directives
Every six years, Member States are asked to report back to the European Commission on the conservation status of species and habitat types protected under the EU Directives. The Commission then pools all the data together, with the help of the European Environment Agency (EEA) and its Topic Centre on Biological Diversity, in
order to see how well they are faring across the EU. In May, the latest results for the reporting period 2007–2012 were published in a Commission report entitled the ‘State of Nature in the EU ’, which is based on a more detailed technical report prepared by the EEA. This article presents some of its key findings. Gathering comparable data on conservation status across 27 countries (Croatia is not included as it only joined the EU in July 2013) is a major undertaking and one that requires an unprecedented level of collaboration between Member States and European Institutions. Thanks to years of careful groundwork, the EU has now succeeded in building up a comprehensive harmonised EU dataset on a significant proportion of its biodiversity. The present reporting exercise involved the collation
of over 17,000 datasets received from Member States which were subsequently used to assess the status of around 450 wild bird species, 230 habitat types and more than 1,200 other species covered by the two Directives. It is also the first time that the results of both Directives are presented together.
EU population status and trends of bird species The State of Nature report concludes that more than half of all wild bird species assessed (52%) have a secure status. However, around 17% of the species are still threatened and another 15% are near threatened, declining or depleted. This includes once common farmland species like the Skylark, Alauda arvensis, and the Black-tailed Godwit, Limosa limosa. Looking at the short-term population trends, these indicate
The European Otter, Lutra lutra, is making a steady recovery in the Atlantic region.
© Andy Rouse / naturepl.com
The European Roller, Coracias garrulus, is covered by an EU Species Action Plan.
© D
ietmar N
ill / naturepl.com
4 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne201544
that 4% of bird species are non-secure but increasing, and 6% are non-secure and stable, even if another 20% are declining. Amongst those that are increasing, it is interesting to note that several species have been the focus of targeted conservation action at EU level. For instance, both the Bearded Vulture, Gypaetus barbatus, and the White-headed Duck, Oxyura leucocephala, have EU Species Action Plans and have benefitted from substantial funds for their conservation under the EU LIFE Fund.
Conservation status and trends of Habitats Directive species According to the State of Nature report, almost a quarter (23%) of the species protected under the Habitats Directive have a favourable conservation status assessment. However, over half (60%) are still in an unfavourable status with 42% considered to be unfavourable – inadequate and 18% unfavourable – bad. In relation to conservation status trends, 4% of species are unfavourable – improving, 20% are unfavourable – stable, 22% are deteriorating, and 14% are without a known trend. The Otter, Lutra lutra, is one of the species that is showing signs of improvement. In the Atlantic region, it has made a steady recovery over the last 20 years thanks to a decrease
in certain waterborne pollutants such as PCBs and mercury, protection from illegal hunting, and improvements in its aquatic habitats. The Large Copper butterfly, Lyceana dispar is also improving across the Continental region thanks to targeted conservation measures. Looking across the different taxonomic groups, the results indicate that only 16% of the fish species protected under the Habitats Directive are assessed as having a favourable conservation status while over a quarter of vascular plants and amphibians are considered favourable. As regards mammals, proportionally more species have a favourable status compared to those that are unfavourable – bad (21% compared to 13%). Nevertheless, a significant proportion (42%) are still unfavourable – inadequate. Amongst those that are unfavourable but improving are species such as the European Bison, Bison bonasus, in the Alpine region, the Grey Seal, Halichoerus grypus in the marine Baltic region, and the Mediterranean Horseshoe Bat, Rhinolophus euryale, in the Mediterranean region. For terrestrial species, the highest proportions of favourable assessments were reported for the Black Sea and Alpine regions (over 30%) while the Boreal (29%) and Atlantic regions (32%) show the highest
share of unfavourable – bad assessments. Although there are a smaller number of species assessments in the marine regions, the proportion of unknown assessments is much higher for these (up to 88% in the Macaronesian region). The Baltic Sea region shows the worst status, with 60% of the assessments being unfavourable – bad, followed by the Black Sea region (33%). Conservation status and trends of habitat types Habitat types, on the whole, show a worse conservation status and trend than species.
Across the EU-27, only 16% of habitat assessments are favourable. This low rate is probably linked to a range of factors, including the longer tradition of conservation action for species, the shorter response times for species, as well as the sheer complexities involved in habitat conservation. The overwhelming majority of habitats have an unfavourable status, with 47% of the assessments being unfavourable – inadequate and 30% being unfavourable – bad. In relation to conservation status trends, a third of the habitat types are unfavourable but stable (33%) but a further
16%20%
52%6%4%
UnknownSecureNot secure – increasingNot secure – stableNot secure – decliningNot secure – uncertain/unknown
2%
Bird species’ population status and trends
UnknownSecureNear Threatened, Declining or DepletedThreatened
16%17%
52%
15%
16%20%
52%6%4%
UnknownSecureNot secure – increasingNot secure – stableNot secure – decliningNot secure – uncertain/unknown
2%
UnknownSecureNear Threatened, Declining or DepletedThreatened
16%17%
52%
15%
UnknownFavourable Unfavourable – improvingUnfavourable – stableUnfavourable – deterioratingUnfavourable – unknown trend
17%
20%
23%
14%
22%
4%
17%
23%
18%
42%
UnknownFavourableUnfavourable – inadequateUnfavourable – bad
Habitats Directive species’ conservation status and trends
UnknownFavourable Unfavourable – improvingUnfavourable – stableUnfavourable – deterioratingUnfavourable – unknown trend
17%
20%
23%
14%
22%
4%
Non-vascular plants
Vascular plants
Molluscs
Arthropods
Amphibians
Reptiles
Mammals
Other invertebrates
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Fish
Conservation status of Habitats Directive species by taxonomic group
Non-vascular plants
Vascular plants
Molluscs
Arthropods
Amphibians
Reptiles
Mammals
Other invertebrates
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Fish
Non-vascular plants
Vascular plants
Molluscs
Arthropods
Amphibians
Reptiles
Mammals
Other invertebrates
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Fish
17%
23%
18%
42%
UnknownFavourableUnfavourable – inadequateUnfavourable – bad
5 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 55
30% are still deteriorating which is a serious cause for concern. Only 4% are showing any improvements so far. Looking at the different habitat groups, it appears that dune habitats have the lowest proportion of assessments marked as favourable while rocky habitats have the highest proportion. Heathland, scrub and sclerophyllous scrub habitats also appear to be doing rather better than the average, with over a quarter of assessments considered favourable. In terms of conservation status trends, bogs, mires and fens seem to be faring the worst – almost half are declining, followed closely by grasslands (40%). Dune habitats have the highest proportion of habitats that are stable. Forests and freshwater habitats are also predominantly unfavourable but stable. On land, the highest proportion of favourable assessments are to be found in the Alpine (25%), Macaronesian (36%) and Steppic regions (50%). On the other hand, the Atlantic and Boreal biogeographical regions show a particularly high proportion of unfavourable – bad assessments, with more than half of all their habitats falling into this category. For the marine regions, it would appear that habitat types are faring much better in the Marine Macaronesian region
(33.3% favourable) and the Marine Black Sea region (14.3% favourable) compared with other regions. By contrast, over 70% of habitat types in the Marine Atlantic region have an unfavourable – bad status. The contribution of the Natura 2000 network The State of Nature also attempted to gauge the influence of the Natura 2000 network on the conservation status of the species and habitat
16%
30% 4%
10%7%
33%UnknownFavourableUnfavourable – improvingUnfavourable – stableUnfavourable – deterioratingUnfavourable – unknown trend
UnknownFavourableUnfavourable – inadequateUnfavourable – bad
7%
16%30%
47%
Conservation status and trends of habitat types
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Rocky habitats
Sclerophyllous scrub
Heath & scrub
Freshwater habitats
Forests
Bogs, mires & fens
Grasslands
Coastal habitats
Dunes habitats
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Conservation status of habitat types by main habitat group
Non-vascular plants
Vascular plants
Molluscs
Arthropods
Amphibians
Reptiles
Mammals
Other invertebrates
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Fish
Non-vascular plants
Vascular plants
Molluscs
Arthropods
Amphibians
Reptiles
Mammals
Other invertebrates
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Favourable Unknown Unfavourable – inadequate Unfavourable – bad
Fish
types for which sites have been designated. In order to see what influence it can have it is important to know first how much of their total area or population is included within the Natura 2000 network. One would expect that the greater the coverage the more likely it is that this will
influence their conservation status. The State of Nature report indicates that the overall conservation status of species and habitats listed under the Habitats Directive is not significantly associated with Natura 2000 coverage. This may be due to the fact that the
Recovery of the Eastern Imperial Eagle
The Eastern Imperial Eagle, Aquila heliaca, is traditionally a lowland species that has been pushed to higher altitudes because of persecution and habitat loss. Breeding sites are threatened primarily by intensive forestry in the mountains, and by a shortage of large trees in steppic and agricultural areas. Other threats include loss of and alteration to feeding habitats, shortages of prey species (particularly Ground Squirrels, Spermophilus spp.), human disturbance, shooting, poisoning, nest robbing and electrocution by powerlines. Many of these threats have now been addressed through a combination of stronger site designation and practical conservation actions such as powerline insulation, prevention of poisoning and protection of nesting trees. Several actions were co-financed through a series of EU LIFE projects (to the tune of €4.7 million) and agri-environmental schemes are now in place to ensure favourable grazing and pasture maintenance in Hungary, Slovakia and Bulgaria. As a result of these efforts, the species population has stabilised in the Balkans and is steadily increasing in Central Europe.
17%
23%
18%
42%
UnknownFavourableUnfavourable – inadequateUnfavourable – bad
UnknownFavourable Unfavourable – improvingUnfavourable – stableUnfavourable – deterioratingUnfavourable – unknown trend
17%
20%
23%
14%
22%
4%
© Bence M
ate / naturepl.com
6 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Annex I Annex II Non-Annex I/II All taxa
% o
f tax
a
IncreasingUncertain/UnknownStableFluctuatingDecreasing
66
necessary conservation and restoration measures have not yet been implemented for the majority of sites or have not had enough time to have a real influence. Nevertheless, looking at the habitats and species with an unfavourable status one can detect a positive correlation between the level of Natura 2000 coverage and conservation status trends. For instance, a significantly greater proportion of habitats with 75–100% coverage within the Natura 2000 network have a stable conservation trend compared to those with less than 35% of their range in Natura 2000. As for the Birds Directive, it is clear that a higher proportion of Annex I bird species, which have the designation of Special Protected Area (SPA) as a key measure, show increasing breeding population trends (40%) compared to species not on Annex I or II (22%). This suggests that targeted conservation action for these species, in particular the management of SPAs, is having a positive effect on their populations. Annex I species and subspecies for which EU Species Action Plans had been developed, and which have priority for funding under the LIFE programme, show an even higher proportion of increasing population trends.
By contrast, huntable species listed on Annex II of the Directive, show the highest percentage of species with a decreasing long-term breeding population trend (40%). It is clear that, in order to have any real impact, the Natura 2000 network needs to be effectively managed. The establishment and timely implementation of Natura 2000 site management plans is a proven and useful tool to achieve this. Putting in place the required conservation and restoration measures also calls for a significant investment of funds. However, according to the State of Nature report, so far only 50% of the sites were reported as having comprehensive management plans and the uptake of funds for conservation has been relatively limited to-date. Many of the opportunities available under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU Regional Policy have yet to be fully exploited.
Pressures and threats In order to gain a better understanding of the underlying threats and pressures on the species and habitats protected under the two nature Directives, Member States were asked to report back on what they considered to be the principle
causes of wildlife loss and habitat degradation. For terrestrial systems, “agriculture” and human-induced “modifications of natural conditions” are the most prominent problems identified for all three groups (birds, other species and habitats). For “agriculture”, the modification of cultivation practices, grazing by livestock (including the abandonment of pastoral systems/lack of grazing), fertilisation and pesticides are the most frequently mentioned pressures and threats. For “modifications of natural conditions”, changes in water-body conditions, modification of hydrological regimes, reduction of habitat connectivity and water abstraction from groundwater are the most frequently reported. This is also consistent with the recent assessments carried out under the Water Framework Directive. For marine systems, the “use of living resources” and “pollution” are the main reported pressures and threats. In the case of the former, this is primarily due to various fishing activities and the harvesting of other aquatic resources. In the case of the latter the key pollution threats come from particular waste products such plastic bags, Styrofoam and non-synthetic compounds as well as oil spills at sea. “Modification of natural
conditions” (dredging, modification of hydrological regimes, coastline management…) and “disturbances due to human activities” are also identified as significant threats as is climate change, especially for marine birds.
Progress in meeting Target 1 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy Target 1 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy aims: “To halt the deterioration in the status of all species and habitats covered by EU nature legislation and achieve a significant and measurable improvement in their status so that, by 2020, compared to current assessments: •100% more habitat
assessments and 50% more species assessments under the Habitats Directive show a favourable or improved conservation status; and
•50% more species assessments under the Birds Directive show a secure or improved status”
In practice this means that, by 2020, 34% of the habitats and 25% of the species should either have reached a favourable conservation status or shown a significant improvement in their status. Similarly for birds, the aim is for 78% of bird species to be either secure or improving by 2020. The State of Nature report concludes that, in the case of
Common Swallowtail butterfly, Papilio machaon.
© Alex H
yde / naturepl.com
Long-term (since 1980) breeding population trend of birds according to annexes
7 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Habitats(Conservation status)
Species(Conservation status)
All birds(Population status)
Favourable SecureUnfavourable - improving Non-secure increasingUnfavourable - no change Non-secure stableUnfavourable - deteriorating Decliningtarget targettarget backcasted
7 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
habitat types protected under the Habitats Directive, very little progress has been made in achieving the Biodiversity Strategy target. At this stage, only 20% of habitat assessments are favourable (16%) or improving (4%) compared to the 34% target set for 2020. On the other hand 30% of all habitats are still deteriorating, while 42% have not changed since 2006. For species, the situation appears, at first glance, to be much more positive. Altogether 28% of species assessments are favourable (23%) or improving (5%) which is already above the 25% target set for 2020. However, much of this change is due to improvements in data and methodology. Taking this into account, the actual increase in favourable assessments for species is very small (1–2%) while 22% of species are still deteriorating and 33% have not changed since 2006. Similarly, there has been little progress towards Target 1 for birds (78% in 2020) with no increase in the number of secure assessments. When considering all bird assessments, 8.5% are non-secure but increasing, 2% are non-secure and stable, and 20% show a further decline.
Looking to the futureThe State of Nature report provides an important snapshot of the current situation as regards conservation status and trends for over 2000 species and habitat types protected under the two EU nature Directives. From this it is clear that, while there is still a long way to go to reach the 2020 target, the Directives are managing to ‘hold the line’ across a significant part of Europe’s biodiversity. This is reflected in the fact that some of the species and habitats protected by the Directives are beginning to show modest signs of improvement. These positive trends, illustrated by success stories from across Europe, provide a first indication that the legislation may well be starting to have an impact and that
targeted conservation action, if taken on a large enough scale, can deliver substantial results on the ground. However, the overall EU status of species and habitats has not significantly changed over the last six years, with many habitats and species still in unfavourable status and a significant proportion are continuing to deteriorate. Some species groups such as freshwater fishes and habitats, such as grasslands or wetlands, are of particular concern. Significant pressures and threats from changes in agricultural practices and continuing modifications of hydrological conditions, as well as over-
exploitation and pollution of the marine environment, need to be tackled to reverse these trends. The Natura 2000 network has a major role to play in this respect. Covering almost a fifth of the EU’s land area as well as a significant part of its marine waters, the effective management and restoration of Natura 2000 sites is central to achieving the overall objectives of the Directives. In many parts of Europe conservation objectives, and measures to implement them, are still being developed. From the trends data one can see that the network is already starting to have an effect. However, these conservation efforts will need
to be further reinforced and expanded if we are to achieve the 2020 biodiversity target. The next report, covering the period 2013–2018, will let us know if these efforts are sufficient to enable significantly more species and habitats to improve their conservation status. For more information: Commission report on the State of Nature in the EU: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/index_en.htm EEA Technical report No. 2/2015 State of Nature in the EU. Results from reporting under the nature Directives 2007–2012: http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/biodiversity Online database of conservation assessments under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive for the reporting period 2007–2012: http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Reporting/Article_17/Reports_2013 Brochure on the State of Nature in the EU: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs/directives_en.htm
Progress to the 2020 Biodiversity Strategy Target 1
© M
ark Ham
blin / naturepl.com
Blanket bog in Scotland, a habitat type protected by the Habitats Directive.
Environment
The State of Nature
in the EU
Reporting under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives 2007–2012
8 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
70°60°50°
40°
40°
30°
30°
20°
20°
10°
10°
0°
0°-10°-20°-30°
60°
50°
50°
40°
40°
30°
30°
0 500 1000 1500 km
-20°
30°
Canary Is.-30°
40°
Azores Is.
Madeira Is.
Biogeographic regions within the EU, 2013
Natura 2000 sites (under Birds and Habitats Directives)
Outside coverage
Member States
NATUrA 2000 SITES (SPAs + SCIs) TErrESTrIAL MArINE
Member States
Total N°Natura 2000
sites
Total area in Natura 2000
(km²)
% land area covered by
Natura 2000Total area SCI
(km²) N° SCIsTotal area SPA (km²) N° SPAs
Total area Natura 2000
(km²)
Total N° Natura sites
on landTotal area SCI (km²) N° SCIs
Total area SPA (km²) N° SPAs
Total area Marine
Natura 2000 (km²)
Total N° Marine Natura
sitesBELGIË/BELGIQUE 457 5 155.58 12.73% 3 065.86 278 2 964.61 231 3 884.81 453 1 127.01 3 318.14 4 1 270.77 7 BELGIUM
BULGARIA 340 41 048.10 34.46% 33 258.06 230 25 226.06 119 38 221.55 336 2 482.23 16 550.33 11 2 826.55 26 BULGARIA
ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA 1 116 11 061.20 14.03% 7 855.61 1 075 7 034.73 41 1 1061.2 1 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 CZECH REPUBLIC
DANMARK 350 22 646.54 8.34% 3 177.78 218 2 605.18 97 3 593.75 294 16 492.08 101 12 183.56 57 19 052.79 150 DENMARK
DEUTSCHLAND 5 252 80 759.17 15.45% 33 487.19 4 577 40 245.08 730 55 157.61 5 216 20 935.45 69 19 718.31 28 25 601.56 93 GERMANY
EESTI 568 14 832.68 17.86% 7 666.69 533 6 157.43 62 8 078.41 557 3 883.94 55 6 479.51 26 6 754.27 62 ESTONIA
ÉIRE/IRELAND 594 19 454.72 13.13% 7 163.96 403 4 311.35 141 9 227.15 544 9 755.13 133 1 583.37 95 10 227.57 228 IRELAND
ELLÁDA 419 42 946.17 27.09% 21 388.24 226 27 622.04 201 35 747.40 403 6 689.40 96 1 904.85 66 7 198.77 152 GREECE
ESPAÑA 1 863 209 121.50 27.23% 116 998.26 1 359 100 895.85 580 137 444.01 1 706 40 553.66 253 52 059.73 141 71 677.49 343 SPAIN
FRANCE 1 754 111 115.07 12.64% 47 192.59 1 309 43 366.39 352 69 417.93 1 661 27 877.15 144 35 543.01 81 41 697.14 225 FRANCE
HRVATSKA 780 25 953.56 36.53% 15 997.91 539 17 036.30 38 20 673.35 577 4 960.66 257 1 106.07 9 5 280.21 266 CROATIA
ITALIA 2 589 63 892.71 18.97% 42 807.17 2 204 40 108.15 603 57 172.16 2 483 5 633.13 319 4 005.26 90 6 720.55 363 ITALY
KÝPROS* 61 1 759.78 28.39% 752.27 37 1 482.66 29 1 628.53 58 131.09 6 110.40 4 131.25 8 CYPRUS*
LATVIJA 333 11 833.18 11.53% 7 418.14 323 6 609.39 93 7 445.81 326 2 663.69 7 4 279.91 6 4 387.37 8 LATVIA
LIETUVA 480 8 926.31 12.15% 6 137.52 403 5 525.79 80 7 932.78 484 527.42 4 739.39 5 993.53 9 LITHUANIA
LUXEMBOURG 60 470.86 18.13% 414.80 49 141.18 13 470.86 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 LUXEMBOURG
MAGYARORSZÁG 525 19 948.51 21.44% 14 442.23 479 13 746.58 56 19 948.51 525 0 0 0 0 0 0 HUNGARY
MALTA 39 233.72 13.08% 40.68 28 13.17 13 41.32 35 192.33 16 3.42 9 192.40 22 MALTA
NEDERLAND 194 17 311.90 13.29% 3 133.61 133 4 765.78 73 5 517.22 187 11 673.38 14 5 735.93 10 11 794.68 18 THE NETHERLANDS
ÖSTERREICH 240 12 615.86 15.04% 9 114.85 192 10 167.88 99 12 615.86 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 AUSTRIA
POLSKA 987 68 400.72 19.56% 33 849.35 847 48 394.14 141 61 164.56 982 4 338.83 9 7 222.77 9 7 236.16 17 POLAND
PORTUGAL 149 21 628.44 20.65% 15 480.66 89 9 200.51 56 18 994.90 141 1 075.61 35 2 283.67 16 2 633.54 49 PORTUGAL
ROMÂNIA 531 55 674.44 22.56% 39 765.43 375 35 347.94 147 53 780.59 522 1 703.18 9 1 629.96 2 1 893.85 11 ROMANIA
SLOVENIJA 354 7 684.29 37.85% 6 635.57 323 5 067.68 29 7 673.69 352 4.36 9 10.4 3 10.6 12 SLOVENIA
SLOVENSKO 514 14 442.27 29.57% 5 837.12 473 13 106.18 41 14 442.27 514 0 0 0 0 0 0 SLOVAKIA
SUOMI 1 839 55 987.65 14.45% 48 556.49 1 666 24 655.45 449 48 847.29 1 803 6 800.05 142 6 424.98 87 7 140.36 168 FINLAND
SVERIGE 4 072 66 738.57 13.84% 56 905.28 3 928 25 330.76 530 57 409.66 4 020 9 258.61 451 4 742.80 138 9 328.91 489 SWEDEN
UNITED KINGDOM 924 94 966.63 8.53% 13 090.40 592 16 002.63 244 20 883.77 835 67 100.91 165 11 556.75 134 74 082.86 298 UNITED KINGDOM
EU28 27 384 1 106 610.13 18.14% 601 633.72 22 888 537 130.89 5 288 788 476.95 26 430 245 859.3 2 313 180 192.52 1 031 318 133.18 3 024 EU28
The Natura Barometer is managed by DG ENV with the technical assistance of the European Environment Agency and is based on information officially transmitted by Member States until December 2014. The Natura 2000 network includes sites designated according to the Birds Directive (SPAs) and the Habitats Directive (SCIs). Both site types frequently often overlap, either in their entirety or partially. The figures relating to the total number of Natura 2000 sites (i.e. SPAs + SCIs) and their area coverage have been obtained by GIS analysis In order to eliminate possible overlaps between the two. The methodology used has recently been refined, which explains why many of the figures are slightly different from the previous Barometer updates.
NB Sites having a terrestrial component covering more than 5% of their total area are counted as terrestrial sites whilst sites having a marine component covering more than 5% of their total area are counted as marine sites. Coastal sites with a marine area covering more than 5% but less than 95% of the total site are counted as both terrestrial and marine sites.
* The area and % of territory corresponds to the area of Cyprus where the Community acquis applies at present, according to protocol 10 of the Accession Treaty of Cyprus.
barometer
Natura 2000 network, December 2013 Natura2000sites
(undertheBirdsandHabitatsDirectives)
9 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
update2014
Member States
NATUrA 2000 SITES (SPAs + SCIs) TErrESTrIAL MArINE
Member States
Total N°Natura 2000
sites
Total area in Natura 2000
(km²)
% land area covered by
Natura 2000Total area SCI
(km²) N° SCIsTotal area SPA (km²) N° SPAs
Total area Natura 2000
(km²)
Total N° Natura sites
on landTotal area SCI (km²) N° SCIs
Total area SPA (km²) N° SPAs
Total area Marine
Natura 2000 (km²)
Total N° Marine Natura
sitesBELGIË/BELGIQUE 457 5 155.58 12.73% 3 065.86 278 2 964.61 231 3 884.81 453 1 127.01 3 318.14 4 1 270.77 7 BELGIUM
BULGARIA 340 41 048.10 34.46% 33 258.06 230 25 226.06 119 38 221.55 336 2 482.23 16 550.33 11 2 826.55 26 BULGARIA
ČESKÁ REPUBLIKA 1 116 11 061.20 14.03% 7 855.61 1 075 7 034.73 41 1 1061.2 1 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 CZECH REPUBLIC
DANMARK 350 22 646.54 8.34% 3 177.78 218 2 605.18 97 3 593.75 294 16 492.08 101 12 183.56 57 19 052.79 150 DENMARK
DEUTSCHLAND 5 252 80 759.17 15.45% 33 487.19 4 577 40 245.08 730 55 157.61 5 216 20 935.45 69 19 718.31 28 25 601.56 93 GERMANY
EESTI 568 14 832.68 17.86% 7 666.69 533 6 157.43 62 8 078.41 557 3 883.94 55 6 479.51 26 6 754.27 62 ESTONIA
ÉIRE/IRELAND 594 19 454.72 13.13% 7 163.96 403 4 311.35 141 9 227.15 544 9 755.13 133 1 583.37 95 10 227.57 228 IRELAND
ELLÁDA 419 42 946.17 27.09% 21 388.24 226 27 622.04 201 35 747.40 403 6 689.40 96 1 904.85 66 7 198.77 152 GREECE
ESPAÑA 1 863 209 121.50 27.23% 116 998.26 1 359 100 895.85 580 137 444.01 1 706 40 553.66 253 52 059.73 141 71 677.49 343 SPAIN
FRANCE 1 754 111 115.07 12.64% 47 192.59 1 309 43 366.39 352 69 417.93 1 661 27 877.15 144 35 543.01 81 41 697.14 225 FRANCE
HRVATSKA 780 25 953.56 36.53% 15 997.91 539 17 036.30 38 20 673.35 577 4 960.66 257 1 106.07 9 5 280.21 266 CROATIA
ITALIA 2 589 63 892.71 18.97% 42 807.17 2 204 40 108.15 603 57 172.16 2 483 5 633.13 319 4 005.26 90 6 720.55 363 ITALY
KÝPROS* 61 1 759.78 28.39% 752.27 37 1 482.66 29 1 628.53 58 131.09 6 110.40 4 131.25 8 CYPRUS*
LATVIJA 333 11 833.18 11.53% 7 418.14 323 6 609.39 93 7 445.81 326 2 663.69 7 4 279.91 6 4 387.37 8 LATVIA
LIETUVA 480 8 926.31 12.15% 6 137.52 403 5 525.79 80 7 932.78 484 527.42 4 739.39 5 993.53 9 LITHUANIA
LUXEMBOURG 60 470.86 18.13% 414.80 49 141.18 13 470.86 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 LUXEMBOURG
MAGYARORSZÁG 525 19 948.51 21.44% 14 442.23 479 13 746.58 56 19 948.51 525 0 0 0 0 0 0 HUNGARY
MALTA 39 233.72 13.08% 40.68 28 13.17 13 41.32 35 192.33 16 3.42 9 192.40 22 MALTA
NEDERLAND 194 17 311.90 13.29% 3 133.61 133 4 765.78 73 5 517.22 187 11 673.38 14 5 735.93 10 11 794.68 18 THE NETHERLANDS
ÖSTERREICH 240 12 615.86 15.04% 9 114.85 192 10 167.88 99 12 615.86 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 AUSTRIA
POLSKA 987 68 400.72 19.56% 33 849.35 847 48 394.14 141 61 164.56 982 4 338.83 9 7 222.77 9 7 236.16 17 POLAND
PORTUGAL 149 21 628.44 20.65% 15 480.66 89 9 200.51 56 18 994.90 141 1 075.61 35 2 283.67 16 2 633.54 49 PORTUGAL
ROMÂNIA 531 55 674.44 22.56% 39 765.43 375 35 347.94 147 53 780.59 522 1 703.18 9 1 629.96 2 1 893.85 11 ROMANIA
SLOVENIJA 354 7 684.29 37.85% 6 635.57 323 5 067.68 29 7 673.69 352 4.36 9 10.4 3 10.6 12 SLOVENIA
SLOVENSKO 514 14 442.27 29.57% 5 837.12 473 13 106.18 41 14 442.27 514 0 0 0 0 0 0 SLOVAKIA
SUOMI 1 839 55 987.65 14.45% 48 556.49 1 666 24 655.45 449 48 847.29 1 803 6 800.05 142 6 424.98 87 7 140.36 168 FINLAND
SVERIGE 4 072 66 738.57 13.84% 56 905.28 3 928 25 330.76 530 57 409.66 4 020 9 258.61 451 4 742.80 138 9 328.91 489 SWEDEN
UNITED KINGDOM 924 94 966.63 8.53% 13 090.40 592 16 002.63 244 20 883.77 835 67 100.91 165 11 556.75 134 74 082.86 298 UNITED KINGDOM
EU28 27 384 1 106 610.13 18.14% 601 633.72 22 888 537 130.89 5 288 788 476.95 26 430 245 859.3 2 313 180 192.52 1 031 318 133.18 3 024 EU28
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CY SI SK LT PL* CZ GR IT* PT AT* DE RO LV ES LU FI* UK FR NL SE MT BG EE DK BE HU IE
SR
IN MAJ
IN MOD
IN MIN
SUF
Note that the graph only covers the terrestrial part of the SCI network, marine species and habitat types are not taken into account. (Situation: December 2013)
* For these countries the evaluation is based on data from 2011 or earlier.
Sufficiency of the European Natura 2000 networkFor Sites of Community Importance under the Habitats Directive (SCIs), the Commission, with assistance from the ETC-BD, evaluates the completeness of the network by individually assessing, for each species and habitat type, whether its occurrence is sufficiently well covered by the existing sites. The level of completeness of Natura 2000 can be expressed as the percentage of species’ and habitats’ assessments per member state indicating that the network is complete. The graph indicates the result of this evaluation for the terrestrial part of Natura 2000:
Sr (scientific reserve): additional research needed to identify the best sites; IN MAJ (major insufficiency): none of the sites where that species/habitat
type occurs have been proposed so far; IN MOD (moderate insufficiency): additional sites still need to be
proposed or existing sites be extended for that species/habitat type; IN MIN (minor insufficiency): sufficiency could be achieved by adding the
species/habitat type as a qualifying feature to existing sites; SUF(sufficient): the network is sufficient for that species/habitat type.
10 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne201510 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
Winnersof the 2015 Natura 2000 Awards
Conservation Project:Blue Reef – Restoration of Stone Reefs in KattegatLocation:LaæsØ Trindel og Tonneberg Banke, Denmark
Thanks to the Blue Reef project, around 5 ha of cavernous boulder reefs – a particularly rich type of marine habitat – have been restored within the Læsø Trindel Natura 2000 site in the heart of the Kattegat Sea. Whereas habitat restoration is quite common on land, this is one of the first large-scale restoration projects of its kind in a marine area. The objectives were to recreate a stable reef with significant areas of crevices and steep slopes and to restore the former very shallow parts of the existing reef. The work, which was carried out by the Danish Nature Agency in collaboration with its partners Aarhus University and DTU Aqua, involved the deployment of over 100,000 stones. The project has turned out to be a resounding success. In less than four years the overall biomass has increased six–eight-fold per m2 of seabed and the population of certain key fish species, such as cod, hake and pollack has tripled. The ecological benefit is expected to increase further in the years to come.
http://naturstyrelsen.dk/naturbeskyttelse/naturprojekter/blue-reef/
For the second year running, the European Commission has launched a Natura 2000 Award to celebrate and promote best practices for nature conservation in Europe. The Award is designed to reward excellence in the management of Natura 2000 sites and showcase the added value of the network for local economies. In addition, it pays tribute to all those who are working tirelessly on making Natura 2000 an operational success whilst drawing public attention to the substantial achievements of the Natura 2000 network so far.
This year’s winners were announced by Commissioner Vella on the 21st May at a high profile ceremony in Brussels. They were selected from a shortlist of 23 finalists, out of a total of 93 applications received. A winner was chosen for each of the five categories by a jury, made up of influential members of the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions, and the NGO and Users community.
The sixth winner was chosen by the public. Known as the EU Citizens’ Award, this new category was introduced this year to allow the public to vote for their favourite finalist. The six finalists are presented here.
For more information go to: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/awards/index_en.htm
The 2015 Natura 2000 Award Winners
CommuniCationProject:Long Live Life! Biodiversity meets Communities Location:Bodanrück und westlicher Bodensee, Germany
To improve awareness of the Natura 2000 network in Germany, Naturfreunde implemented two campaigns between 2010 and 2014. The first involved the creation of a network of 40 carefully selected Natura trails in Baden-Württemberg designed for local communities so that they could learn about the natural treasures that exist on their doorstep. The second campaign involved an exhibition ‘Es lebe das Leben’ to showcase the Natura 2000 network in Europe and in the region of Baden-Württemberg. The exhibition was shown in town halls and other public facilities and was combined with regular speeches from mayors and other stakeholders. A series of Natura 2000 days – involving hiking tours, bike rides and canoe tours – were also organised at more than 30 sites.
http://www.nfi.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=585&Itemid=91#
10 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
Winnersof the 2015 Natura 2000 Awards
Conservation Project:Blue Reef – Restoration of Stone Reefs in KattegatLocation:LaæsØ Trindel og Tonneberg Banke, Denmark
Thanks to the Blue Reef project, around 5 ha of cavernous boulder reefs – a particularly rich type of marine habitat - have been restored within the Læsø Trindel Natura 2000 site in the heart of the Kattegat Sea. Whereas habitat restoration is quite common on land, this is one of the first large-scale restoration projects of its kind in a marine area. The objectives were to recreate a stable reef with significant areas of crevices and steep slopes and to restore the former very shallow parts of the existing reef. The work, which was carried out by the Danish Nature Agency in collaboration with its partners Aarhus University and DTU Aqua, involved the deployment of over 100,000 stones. The project has turned out to be a resounding success. In less than four years the overall biomass has increased six–eight-fold per m2 of seabed and the population of certain key fish species, such as cod, hake and pollack has tripled. The ecological benefit is expected to increase further in the years to come.
http://naturstyrelsen.dk/naturbeskyttelse/naturprojekter/blue-reef/
For the second year running, the European Commission has launched a Natura 2000 Award to celebrate and promote best practices for nature conservation in Europe. The Award is designed to reward excellence in the management of Natura 2000 sites and showcase the added value of the network for local economies. In addition, it pays tribute to all those who are working tirelessly on making Natura 2000 an operational success whilst drawing public attention to the substantial achievements of the Natura 2000 network so far.
This year’s winners were announced by Commissioner Vella on the 21st May at a high profile ceremony in Brussels. They were selected from a shortlist of 23 finalists, out of a total of 93 applications received. A winner was chosen for each of the five categories by a jury, made up of influential members of the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions as well as the NGO community.
The sixth winner was nominated by the public. Known as the Citizens’ Award, this new category was introduced this year to allow the public to vote for their favourite finalist. The six finalists are presented here.
For more information go to: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/awards/index_en.htm
The 2015 Natura 2000 Award Winners
CommuniCationProject:Long Live Life! Biodiversity meets Communities Location:Bodanrück und westlicher Bodensee, Germany
To improve awareness of the Natura 2000 network in Germany, Naturfreunde implemented two campaigns between 2010 and 2014. The first involved the creation of a network of 40 carefully selected Natura trails in Baden-Württemberg designed for local communities so that they could learn about the natural treasures that exist on their doorstep. The second campaign involved an exhibition ‘Es lebe das Leben’ to showcase the Natura 2000 network in Europe and in the region of Baden-Württemberg. The exhibition was shown in town halls and other public facilities and was combined with regular speeches from mayors and other stakeholders. A series of Natura 2000 days – involving hiking tours, bike rides and canoe tours – were also organised at more than 30 sites.
http://www.nfi.at/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=585&Itemid=91#
10 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
11 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
european Citizen’s award Project:Natura 2000 Day Location:Doñana, Spain
In order to raise awareness about the Natura 2000 network, SEO/BirdLife and BirdLife Europe created the ‘European Natura 2000 Day’, as part of the Life+ project ‘Natura 2000: Connecting people with biodiversity’, implemented in partnership with Agencia EFE. In order to promote the initiative, everyone is asked to make a gesture, with their hands in the shape of a butterfly, to show support for preserving nature and wildlife. Each year, these events are dedicated to the conservation of a particular Natura 2000 site in Europe. In 2014, it was the turn of Doñana, a vast area of coastal wetland, dunes, cork oak, pine forest and ‘matorral’ in southern Spain that supports thousands of species, including the Spanish Imperial eagle and Iberian Lynx. Since the beginning of the campaign in 2013, more than 19,000 people have joined the different events across Europe and over 3 million social network accounts have been reached.
http://www.natura2000day.eu
soCio-eConomiC Benefits Project:Vultures: Providing Gains for Natura and CommunitiesLocation:Gorges du Tarn et de la Jonte, France
The dramatic Natura 2000 site ‘Gorges du Tarn et de la Jonte’ in southern France hosts a wealth of threatened bird species, including Griffon, Black and Egyptian Vultures. Since 2008, the Hunting Federation of Lozere has been promoting actions to support agro-pastoralism and tourism based on this rich wildlife. The Federation has engaged local farmers to maintain the open habitats through sheep grazing and shrub control and has set up feeding posts for the vultures. The latter offer farmers an economically advantageous way of disposing of livestock carcasses. The vultures have also become a ‘made in Lozere’ trademark. There are now 600 operational accommodation facilities for tourists in the area and more than 30,000 people visited the Vulture Hause information centre last year, where one can also taste the local Vulture beer (La Feuve). This is a great example of nature conservation and economic development going hand in hand.
http://gorgestarnjonte.n2000.fr/
Cross-Border Cooperation and networkingProject:DANUBEPARKS – Bridging Natura 2000 Sites Along the Danube River Habitat CorridorLocation:30 Natura 2000 Sites in nine Danube Countries
Passing through 10 countries, the Danube is the world s most international river. With its diverse habitats, it forms the backbone for biodiversity in South East Europe. Within DANUBEPARKS, managers of all relevant Danube Protected Areas and over 30 Natura 2000 sites on the Danube are systematically tackling common challenges on a Danube-wide scale through transnational task forces and strategies. Since 2009, over 150 actions have been implemented along the river corridor, focussing on habitat management, conservation of flagship species, river restoration, nature tourism and public awareness. DANUBEPARKS has since become an example of a successful integrated approach that reconciles conservation with other uses such as waterway transport, forestry and tourism. The huge interest in DANUBEPARKS’ festivals, events and publications help to stimulate the public’s fascination with Natura 2000 sites.
http://www.danubeparks.org
reConCiling interests/perCeptionsProject:Favourable Social Environments for Bear ConservationLocation:Fuentes del Narcea, Degana e Ibias, Spain
The Cantabrian Mountains host one of the last remaining viable Brown Bear population in Spain. For several years now, the Fundación Oso Pardo (FOP) has been working with local stakeholders to reduce the human–bear conflicts within the region. Agreements reconciling the practice of hunting with the conservation of bears have been signed with the Spanish and Cantabrian hunting federations, involving more than 4,500 hunters and affecting more than 280,000 hectares of bear territory. Rangers and hunters are also working together to tackle poaching, clear vegetation and monitor bear numbers. In addition FOP has delivered more than 1,400 electric fences to hunters, beekeepers and gamekeepers to prevent damage to their livelihoods. As a result of these actions and the awareness-raising work, hunters and local communities are currently proud to live amongst bears, and human-caused bear mortality has been drastically reduced. The Cantabrian bear population has grown in recent years from 70 individuals to over 230. In this case, cohabitation is the key to conservation.
http://www.fundacionosopardo.org
11 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015The 2015 Natura 2000 Award Winners
european Citizen’s award Project:Natura 2000 Day Location:Doñana, Spain
In order to raise awareness about the Natura 2000 network, SEO/BirdLife and BirdLife Europe created the ‘European Natura 2000 Day’, as part of the Life+ project ‘Natura 2000: Connecting people with biodiversity’, implemented in partnership with Agencia EFE. In order to promote the initiative, everyone is asked to make a gesture, in the shape of a butterfly, to show support for preserving nature and wildlife. Each year, these events are dedicated to the conservation of a particular Natura 2000 site in Europe. In 2014, it was the turn of Doñana, a vast area of coastal wetland, dunes, cork oak, pine forest and ‘matorral’ in southern Spain that supports thousands of species, including the Spanish Imperial eagle and Iberian Lynx. Since the beginning of the campaign in 2013, more than 19,000 people have joined the different events across Europe and over 3 million social network accounts have been reached.
http://www.natura2000day.eu
soCio-eConomiC Benefits Project:Vultures: Providing Gains for Natura and CommunitiesLocation:Gorges du Tarn et de la Jonte, France
The dramatic Natura 2000 site ‘Gorges du Tarn et de la Jonte’ in southern France hosts a wealth of threatened bird species, including Griffon, Black and Egyptian Vultures. Since 2008, the Hunting Federation of Lozere has been promoting actions to support agro-pastoralism and tourism based on this rich wildlife. The Federation has engaged local farmers to maintain the open habitats through sheep grazing and shrub control and has set up feeding posts for the vultures. The latter offer farmers an economically advantageous way of disposing of livestock carcasses. The vultures have also become a ‘made in Lozere’ trademark. There are now 600 operational accommodation facilities for tourists in the area and more than 30,000 people visited the Vulture Hause information centre last year, where one can also taste the local Vulture beer (La Feuve). This is a great example demonstrating that nature conservation and economic development go hand in hand.
http://gorgestarnjonte.n2000.fr/
Cross-Border Cooperation and networkingProject:DANUBEPARKS – Bridging Natura 2000 Sites Along the Danube River Habitat CorridorLocation:30 Natura 2000 Sites in nine Danube Countries
Passing through 10 countries, the Danube is the world s most international river. With its diverse habitats, it forms the backbone for biodiversity in South East Europe. Within DANUBEPARKS, managers of all relevant Danube Protected Areas and over 30 Natura 2000 sites on the Danube are systematically tackling common challenges on a Danube-wide scale through transnational task forces and strategies. Since 2009, over 150 actions have been implemented along the river corridor. The have focused on habitat management, conservation of flagship species, river restoration, nature tourism and public awareness. DANUBEPARKS is an example of a successful integrated approach, including inland waterways, forestry and tourism. Huge interest in DANUBEPARKS’ festivals, events and publications highlights the leading role of Protected Areas in stimulating the public’s fascination with Natura 2000 sites.
http://www.danubeparks.org
reConCiling interests/perCeptionsProject:Favourable Social Environments for Bear ConservationLocation:Fuentes del Narcea, Degana e Ibias, Spain
The Cantabrian Mountains host one of the last remaining viable Brown Bear population in Spain. For several years now, the Fundación Oso Pardo (FOP) has been working with local stakeholders to reduce the human–bear conflicts within the region. Agreements reconciling the practice of hunting with the conservation of bears, have been signed with the Spanish and Cantabrian hunting federations, involving more than 4,500 hunters and affecting more than 280,000 hectares of bear territory. Rangers and hunters are also working together to tackle poaching, clear vegetation and monitor bear numbers. FOP has also delivered more than 1,400 electric fences to hunters, beekeepers and gamekeepers to prevent damage to their livelihoods. As a result of these actions and the awareness-raising work, hunters and local communities are currently proud to live amongst bears, and human-caused bear mortality has been drastically reduced. The Cantabrian bear population has grown in recent years from 70 individuals to over 230. Cohabitation is the key to conservation.
http://www.fundacionosopardo.org
11 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
12 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne20151212
In April, the European Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB), launched a new financing instrument called the Natural Capital Financing Facility (NCFF). It is one of the new measures foreseen under the EU LIFE programme for 2014–2020 to support projects that promote the preservation of natural capital, including adaptation to climate change, in the Member States.
The primary objective is to demonstrate that natural capital projects can generate revenues or save costs, while delivering on biodiversity and climate adaptation objectives. Currently, there are clear barriers to the uptake of many natural capital projects, including lack of experience, long investment and project payback periods, and uncertainties about target markets, revenue streams and profit margins.
The NCFF sets out to establish a pipeline of replicable, bankable projects that will serve as a “proof of concept” and that will demonstrate to potential investors the attractiveness of such projects. Projects must fall into one of the following categories: payments for ecosystem services; green infrastructure; biodiversity offsets; and investments for innovative pro-biodiversity and adaptation businesses (see box). The final recipients for NCFF can be public or private entities, including public authorities, land owners and businesses. The pilot phase of the NCFF will last three years. During this period a total of €100–125 million will be made available for investments in around 9–12 operations. The NCFF will make investments either directly or indirectly through intermediaries and will finance up to 75% of the total project costs, with a maximum of €15 million for each direct investment. The NCFF may also invest in equity
The Natural Capital Financing Facility
natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 ©
Simon Colm
er / naturepl.com
© Terry W
hittaker / naturepl.com
NCFF can fund investments in urban green infrastructure, such as wildlife verges along the roadside.
NCFF projects can include conservation actions intended to compensate for the residual, unavoidable harm to biodiversity caused by development projects.
13 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 13
funds, taking a maximum share of 33% and will be proportionate to other contributions. Given the limited experience in financing natural capital projects through market-based mechanisms, a €10 million support facility will assist with the preparation and implementation of projects that have a good chance of being awarded NCFF funding. Support may consist of external advice and consultancy services in relation to market, financial, economic, business planning, as well as social and environmental aspects of the projects, and in relation to the monitoring of the impacts on environment and ecosystems. For projects involving financial intermediaries, support may be provided for identifying, screening and assessing the technical, environmental and climate change adaptation aspects of the underlying projects, as well as profitability assessments. Such support shall, however, not substitute the normal operating costs of the financial intermediary. Proposals will be considered for approval by the EIB, after satisfactory due diligence and within the constraints of the available budget. The steps in the selection process include, inter alia:•a screening of the eligibility of
the project and an
assessment of the capacity, experience and resources of the candidate;
•the strength and coherence of the business model;
•the structure of the investment;
•biodiversity and climate adaptation impacts;
•the potential for demonstration effect, replicability and transferability;
•the ability of the project to leverage additional project funding;
•and the creation and safeguarding of employment.
Expressions of interest can be made to the EIB at any time. For more information go to: http://www.eib.org/products/blending/ncff/index.htm or http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/funding/financial_instruments/ncff.htm
© Kerstin H
inze / naturepl.com
Examples of potential NCFF projects → Naturalcapitalinvestmentsthatenhancewaterqualityor
floodretention,attractingpaymentsfromutilities,foodanddrinksector,localauthorities,propertyinterestsorinsurers.
→ Investmentsinpeatlandorforestrestoration,attractingpaymentsforcarboncredits,waterqualityand/orotherservices.
→ Investmentsinurbangreeninfrastructure(e.g.greenspaces,greenroofsandwalls,trees,sustainabledrainagesystems).
→ Greenalternativestotraditionalinfrastructureinvestments(e.g.flooddefence,wastewatertreatment).
→ Certifiedproductsandservices,environmentaltechnologies,consultancyandtechnicalservices,financialproductsandservices,ecotourismbusinesses.
CATEGOrIES ELIGIBLE FOr NCFF FINANCING
Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)Projectsinvolvingpaymentsfortheflowsofbenefitsresultingfromnaturalcapital,usuallyavoluntarysmall-scalebilateraltransactionwithawell-identifiedbuyerandsellerofanecosystemservice.Theyarebasedonthebeneficiary-paysprinciple,wherebypaymentstakeplacetosecurecriticalecosystemservices.
Green infrastructure (GI)GIisastrategicallyplannednetworkofnaturalandsemi-naturalareaswithotherenvironmentalfeaturesdesignedandmanagedtodeliverawiderangeofecosystemservices.Itincorporatesgreenspaces(orblueifaquaticecosystemsareconcerned)andotherphysicalfeaturesinterrestrial(includingcoastal)andmarineareas.GIprojectshavethepotentialtogeneraterevenuesorsavecostsbasedontheprovisionofgoodsandservicessuchaswatermanagement,airquality,forestry,recreation,pollinationandincreasedresiliencetotheconsequencesofclimatechange.
Biodiversity offsetsTheseareconservationactionsintendedtocompensatefortheresidual,unavoidableharmtobiodiversitycausedbydevelopmentprojects.Theyarebasedonthepolluter-paysprinciple,wherebyoffsetsareundertakenforcomplianceortomitigaterisks.However,projectsaimedatcompensatingdamagesdonetoNatura2000sitesaccordingtoArticle6.4oftheHabitatsDirectivearenoteligibleforfinancingundertheNCFF.
Innovative pro-biodiversity and adaptation investmentsInnovativepro-biodiversityandadaptationinvestmentsareprojectsinvolvingthesupplyofgoodsandservices,mostlybySMEs,whichaimtoprotectbiodiversityorincreasetheresilienceofcommunitiesandotherbusinesssectors.Innovationmayrelatetoinnovativeapproachestoecologicalrestoration/conservationorinnovativebusinessmodelssuchasharnessingethicalinvestmentsandaddingvaluetogoodsandservicesthroughcertificationandstandardsschemes.
Capital investments to enhance water quality are eligible for NCFF funding.
© John W
aters / naturepl.com
14 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
• NEWS • PUBLICATIONS • EVENTS
Public consultation on the nature Directives The Commission is currently carrying out a ‘fitness check’ of the EU Birds and Habitats Directives as part of its new agenda for smart regulation (see previous issue). This involves a comprehensive policy evaluation aimed at assessing whether the regulatory framework for the Directives remains ‘fit for purpose’. As part of this exercise, the Commission has launched a public internet consultation in order to offer civil society an opportunity to give their views. The questionnaire is available in the 23 official languages of the EU and is open until the 24th July. Everyone is encouraged to take part. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/nature_fitness_check_en.htm The high-level conference on the fitness check review is now
scheduled for 23 October in Brussels. Regular updates on the fitness check are available on:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/fitness_check/index_en.htm
New red List for beesIn March, the IUCN published a new European Red List of Bees. The report, which was funded by the European Commission, provides – for the first time – information on all 1,965 wild bee species in Europe, including their status, distribution, population trends and threats. Bees are not only an important component of Europe’s biodiversity, they also provide crop pollination estimated to be worth €22 billion a year to the EU economy (14.2 billion for EU 25). However, according to the research undertaken, 9.2% of European wild bee species are
and the first results of the 2007–2012 reporting exercise under the Habitats and Birds Directives, the Ministers went on to debate the challenges that lie ahead in meeting the 2020 biodiversity target, and the opportunities available for encouraging a better integration of biodiversity into other key policy areas.
The following day, the EU Environment and Energy Ministers met to explore the potential synergies between EU environmental, climate and energy policy objectives. Given their strategic importance and inextricable links, the Ministers stressed the importance of ensuring that the policy goals are reached in a mutually supportive way, i.e. preserving biodiversity and increasing the resilience of ecosystems on the one hand, and effectively mitigating climate change and increasing energy security on the other hand.
The State of Environment Report is available on: http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer
2015 LIFE call for proposalsThe 2015 call for proposals for LIFE grants opens on the 1 June. Applicants have until 15 September to submit traditional LIFE Nature and Biodiversity project proposals, and until 1 October to send in concept notes for the new Integrated Projects.
Integrated projects are designed to take a more programmatic approach in terms of implementing the two nature Directives across a broader geographical area while ensuring involvement of
threatened with extinction, while 12% are considered likely to be threatened in the near future. One of the main threats to their survival comes from the large-scale loss and degradation of suitable bee habitats which is mostly caused by intensive agriculture and changing farming practices, such as a concentration on silage production at the expense of hay-cropping, and the widespread use of insecticides and fertilisers. Urban development and climate change are other important drivers of extinction risk with latter in particularly affecting bumblebees. The report goes on to stress the need for further research to guide effective conservation action. More than half of all species are classified as “Data Deficient” because of the serious lack of experts, data and funding. This not only makes it difficult to evaluate the full extent of their extinction risk but also to identify the most appropriate conservation measures that should be put in place to aide their recovery. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/redlist/downloads/European_bees.pdf
EU informal Environmental CouncilUnder the Latvian Presidency of the EU, the 28 Environment Ministers met on 14 April in Riga to discuss progress in implementing the EU Biodiversity Strategy in anticipation of its upcoming mid-term review this Autumn. Having taken stock of the findings of new State of Environment Report (SOER2015)
A total of 25.8% of Europe’s bumblebee species are now threatened with extinction. Climate change is an important driver of extinction risk for most species of bees, particularly bumblebees.
© Phil Savoie / naturepl.com
15 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015 1515
stakeholders and promoting the coordination with, and mobilisation of, at least one other relevant EU, national or private funding source.
Applicants that have been pre-selected on the basis of their concept note will have until mid-April 2016 to submit their full proposal.
Details available on: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/funding/life2015/index.htm#nat
The EU BEST initiative The EU’s BEST initiative aims to promote biodiversity protection and sustainable use of ecosystem services, including ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation, in the EU Outermost Regions (ORs) and Overseas Countries and Territories. The recently agreed BEST 2.0 Programme, which is part of the EU B4LIFE flagship Fund, aims to set up a funding facility for small-scale and medium-scale field actions in EU Overseas Countries and Territories and will provide small and medium-size grants for biodiversity action. The specific objective is to enable, empower and strengthen local authorities and civil society organisations that are committed to local development, biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of ecosystem services in OCTs. The provisional agenda of the BEST 2.0 foresees two calls for proposals in Summer–Autumn 2015 and two calls in Spring 2016.
More detailed information will become available soon on the BEST website and in the upcoming BEST e-newsletter: http://ec.europa.eu/best
Biodiversity proofing study The EU has committed itself to ensuring that spending under the EU budget has no negative impacts on biodiversity, and is generally supportive to achieving EU biodiversity targets. With this in mind, the Commission has issued a
practical “Common Framework for Proofing the EU Budget” which includes both general and fund-specific guidelines to be used by national and regional authorities as well as by Commission services.
The general guidelines offer a standardised approach that can be applied to most EU funds whilst the fund-specific guidance documents mainly focus on biodiversity proofing the project cycle, i.e. calls for proposals, project development and selection, project execution and project monitoring and evaluation. The latter are currently available for the CAP, Cohesion Fund, Connecting Europe facility and European Maritime and Fisheries Fund.
Go to: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/comm2006/proofing.htm
Marine Biogeographical SeminarBuilding on the experience from the terrestrial seminars, a kick-off seminar for marine biogeographical regions was held in St Malo, France on 5–7 May. Hosted by the French Ministry of Environment, in close collaboration with the European Commission, the seminar was attended by over 100 experts from across the EU and provided a welcome opportunity to exchange experiences and good practices in an informal setting.
The workshop focused on three themes in particular: 1. conservation objectives,
definition assessment and use for adaptive management;
2. reconciling Natura 2000 objectives and marine activities/conservation management planning; and
3. regional integration of Natura 2000 issues.
The seminar report will be available by the end of the Summer on the Natura 2000 Communication Platform
website, along with the case study examples, the Powerpoint presentations and workshop summaries. See: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/platform/index_en.htm
Natura 2000 seminar for the Continental regionThe Continental kick-off seminar, hosted by the Luxembourg Ministry for Sustainable Development and
Pale-throated Sloth, Bradypus tridactylus, French Guiana.
natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
The marine biogeographical seminar was held in St Malo, Brittany.
© Philippe Clem
ent / naturepl.com©
Daniel H
euclin / naturepl.com
16 natureandb iod ivers i tynewsletter | Ju ne2015
TheNatura2000NewsletterisproducedbyDGEnvironment,EuropeanCommission
Author:KerstinSundsethEcosystemsLTD,BrusselsCommissionEditor:SylviaBarova,DGEnvironmentDesign:www.naturebureau.co.uk
ThenewsletterisproducedtwiceayearandisavailableinEnglish,French,German,Spanish,ItalianandPolish.
Tobeaddedtothemailinglist,ortodownloadtheelectronicversion,visithttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs:natura2000nl_en.htm
ThenewsletterdoesnotnecessarilyreflecttheofficialviewoftheEuropeanCommission.
PrintedonrecycledpaperthathasbeenawardedtheEUEcolabel(http://ec.europa.eu/ecolabel)
©EuropeanUnion,(2015)Reproductionofcontentotherthanphotographsisauthorisedprovidedthesourceisacknowledged.
Photocredits:Cover©RogerPowell/naturepl.com;p2©AlexHyde/©DavidWoodfall/©PhilSavoie/naturepl.com;p3©AndyRouse/©DietmarNill/naturepl.com;p5©BenceMate/naturepl.com;p6©AlexHyde/naturepl.com;p7©MarkHamblin/naturepl.com;pp10–11©EuropeanCommission;p12©SimonColmer/©TerryWhitaker/naturepl.com;p13©KirstinHinze/©JohnWaters/naturepl.com;p14©PhilSavoie/naturepl.com;p15©DanielHeuclin/©PhilippeClement/naturepl.com
Infrastructures, will take place in Luxembourg from 29 June to 1 July. It will also cover the Pannonian, Black Sea and Steppic regions. The background document and agenda, along with information on all past and up-coming events is available on the Natura 2000 Communication Platform. See: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ natura2000/platform/index_ en.htm
Sensitivity analysis of fisheries activitiesThe Commission has recently published an overview of the potential interactions and impacts of commercial fishing methods on marine habitats and species protected under the EU Habitats Directive. The document is based on reviews in scientific literature and, particularly, international peer-reviewed journals, research reports and conference publications from internationally recognised scientific institutions.
Its purpose is to offer Member States a first overview of activities that could ‘a priori’ have significant negative impacts on marine habitats and species under the Habitats Directive so that they may be investigated further when deciding on the management of marine Natura 2000 sites.
See: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/
marine/docs/Fisheries%20interactions.pdf
Green Week 2015This year’s theme for Green Week was ‘Nature – our health, our wealth’.
Held in Brussels from 3–5 June, the event attracted over 3,000 participants from across Europe and beyond. A wide variety of topics were explored during the three-day event, ranging from conserving nature in our seas, creating jobs and growth through green infrastructure, linking cultural and natural capital, and exploring the relationship between nature and health, to using Natura 2000 as a source of regional identity and values, innovating cities with nature and using the CAP to promote nature-based tourism, etc.
Full details on: http://www.greenweek2015.eu
LIFE and freshwater fishThe latest LIFE Nature Focus publication takes a close look at the work of LIFE projects in protecting threatened freshwater fish species and improving their habitats. Since 1992, more than 135 LIFE projects have targeted some 50 threatened freshwater fish species listed in the annexes of the EU Habitats Directive or in the IUCN European Red List.
The publication features a range of best practice examples from LIFE projects, including in-depth profiles of projects in Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy and Spain. It concludes with a set of lessons from LIFE for all those involved in fish species conservation.
See: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/publications/lifepublications/lifefocus/documents/fish.pdf
EnvironmentLIFE Nature
LIFE and freshwater fish
KH-AA-15-001-EN
-N
