EU Biodiversity Policy Research Articles

Indicators for mapping and assessment of ecosystem condition and of the ecosystem service habitat maintenance in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020

A systematic approach to map and assess the “maintenance of nursery populations and habitats” ecosystem service (ES) (hereinafter called “habitat maintenance”) has not yet emerged. In this article, we present an ecosystem service framework implementation at landscape level, by proposing an approach for calculating and combining a series of indicators with spatial modelling techniques. Necessary conceptual elements for this approach are: a) ecosystem condition, b) supply and demand of the targeted ecosystem service and c) spatial relationships between the Service Providing Units (SPU) and the Service Connecting Units (SCU). Ecosystem condition is quantified and mapped based on two indicators, the Biodiversity State and the Anthropogenic Impact. Quantification and mapping of supply and demand are based on the hypothesis that high supply can be activated in strictly protected areas and that a demand is localised in the Natura 2000 sites (N2K), considering them as the Service Benefit Areas (SBA). Wetlands are assessed as SCU between the SBA and the landscape areas where the habitat maintenance ES is supplied. By assessing wetlands as SCU, we intent to highlight their role as biodiversity stepping stones and as green infrastructures. Overall, we conclude that the EU biodiversity policy demand for no net loss and for a coherent N2K network can be met by enhancing the delivery of the habitat maintenance ES. This approach can assist policy-makers in prioritisation of conservation and restoration targets, in line with the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 and the preparation of the post-2020 Strategy.

The impact of Natura 2000 designation on agricultural land rents in Germany

Designation of Natura 2000 areas is a major cornerstone in the EU's biodiversity policy. However, it has triggered resistance from land users due to increased regulations on land use and related value change. This study first develops a theoretical model for rent change due to land regulation, and then empirically investigates whether farmland rents in Germany are affected by Natura 2000 designation. We use a matching procedure based on a zero-inflated beta generalized propensity score on German district level agricultural census data. Our results suggest that rental prices of grassland, arable land, and on average are affected negatively by Natura 2000.

Framing and visualising biodiversity in EU policy

This study seeks insights into how biodiversity is framed and visualised in EU policy. The paper presents analysis of both the visual content and written text of two brochures summarising two central EU biodiversity policy documents. The study illustrates how the two modes of communication differ. First, the written text primarily presents an anthropocentric and economic framing of biodiversity values, whereas the visual material generally features the beauty and wonders of nature. Second, the written text strongly emphasises the threats to biodiversity and the detrimental side of human activity, whereas the visual material generally shows close relationships between humans and nature, with humans engaged in small-scale outdoor activities. The analysis illustrates how various representations of biodiversity intersect in the same context, and that the visual representation decontextualises the issue of biodiversity loss from the human exploitation of natural resources and the concrete actions and processes causing it.

Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy—A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland

We explore the occurrence of the ecosystem services (ES) concept in public policies in Poland by providing a systematic content analysis of national environmental policies. A detailed analysis of the legal acts, national strategies, and decrees using the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services codes, which embraces a full range of ES, shows that the ES concept is reflected in the investigated documents. However, it is mainly depicted in an indirect, latent form. We further explore the ES concept occurrence in the Polish legislation with in-depth interviews of experts. From the interviews we identify two general groups of barriers to the ES concept implementation in environmental policy: (a) a limited understanding and acknowledgement of the concept among individuals involved in policy making; and (b) sectoral divisions within environmental governance that hinder the spread of the concept. Analysis reveals that the concept of services for society provided by nature had already been perceived in Polish national environmental policies before the emergence of the ES concept and the implementation of the EU biodiversity policy. However, the concept is referred to mostly in a latent form, before and after its emergence.

A new view on EU agricultural landscapes: Quantifying patchiness to assess farmland heterogeneity

Mapping and assessment of ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes as required by the EU biodiversity policy need a better characterization of the given landscape typology according to its ecological and cultural values. Such need should be accommodated by a better discrimination of the landscape characteristics linked to the capacity of providing ecosystem services and socio-cultural benefits. Often, these key variables depend on the degree of farmland heterogeneity and landscape patterns. We employed segmentation and landscape metrics (edge density and image texture respectively), derived from a pan-European multi-temporal and multi-spectral remote sensing dataset, to generate a consistent European indicator of farmland heterogeneity, the Farmland Heterogeneity Indicator (FHI). We mapped five degrees of FHI on a wall-to-wall basis (250m spatial resolution) over European agricultural landscapes including natural grasslands. Image texture led to a clear improvement of the indicator compared to the pure application of Edge Density, in particular to a better detection of small patches. In addition to deriving a qualitative indicator we attributed an approximate patch size to each class, allowing an indicative assessment of European field sizes. Based on CORINE land cover, we identified pastures and heterogeneous land cover classes as classes with the highest degree of FHI, while agroforestry and olive groves appeared less heterogeneous on average. We performed a verification based on a continental and regional scale, which resulted in general good agreement with independently derived data.

Symbolic transformation of environmental governance: implementation of EU biodiversity policy in Bulgaria and Croatia between Europeanization and domestic politics

In this paper, we explore how European and domestic factors have shaped environmental governance in the case of European Union biodiversity policy implementation in Bulgaria and Croatia. We argue that a ‘symbolic transformation’ of environmental governance in Bulgaria and Croatia has occurred, as the interplay between Europeanization and domestic politics has led to differential empowerment of state and non-state actors resulting in ineffective environmental governance. While proenvironment non-state groups (environmental non-governmental organizations, scientists) and European Union institutions were empowered in the phase of formal compliance, economic interest groups have held sway over the phase of practical (non-)compliance. At the same time, state actors have responded rationally to retain their power by adapting to opposing forces from above and below. We conclude by discussing the ‘symbolic transformation’ of environmental governance shifting between ‘command-and-control’ and ‘non-hierarchical’ coordination with regards to the transformative power of Europe in light of Europeanization research in old and new European Union member states.

How climate proof is the European Union’s biodiversity policy?

In the European Union’s (EU) targets for the year 2020, climate change is recognised as a key challenge for biodiversity conservation. Meeting this challenge requires insight at three levels: the climate change impacts on biodiversity in the EU; the adaptation options put forward to alleviate these impacts; and how current EU policy can accommodate the adaptation options. These three topics have all been discussed in the peer-reviewed literature, but typically in isolation and with potential bias in attention for specific aspects such as species distribution shifts and network connectivity. Here, we bring these three levels together to identify matches and gaps between them, to guide policy development. In particular, we assess key concerns on the degree to which EU biodiversity policy facilitates climate change adaptation. Our findings indicate that, firstly, available adaptation options do not cover all impacts of climate change. Options are biased towards shifts and contractions in species distributions, while, e.g., disruption of species interactions is not addressed yet. Second, proposed adaptation options are often generic and lack spatial specificity, revealing an urgent need for guidance on identifying appropriate, albeit adaptive responses to the range of climate change impacts. Third, while EU biodiversity policy requires and supports adaptation in several ways, its narrow interpretation hinders its potential to conserve biodiversity under climate change. Remaining policy gaps include: (1) conservation targets need to better match conservation needs; (2) targets need to be set in a spatially coherent manner across national scales; (3) current monitoring appears insufficient to address these gaps.

Natura 2000 and climate change—Polarisation, uncertainty, and pragmatism in discourses on forest conservation and management in Europe

European forests are a resource that is targeted by several EU environmental and land use policies as forests can be of critical importance to mitigate climate change. At the same time, they are central to the EU's biodiversity policy, and particular the Natura 2000 network of protected areas. Yet, the interlinkage between climate change and biodiversity policy is complex and discursively contested. In this paper, we assess how the debate on climate change adaptation affects forest conservation and management under Natura 2000. Drawing on the concept of argumentative discourse analysis, we present evidence from 213 qualitative interviews with policy stakeholders and practitioners that were conducted at both the European policy level and the local country level in 6 EU member states. Our results demonstrate that the nexus between climate change adaptation and forest conservation policy is conceptualised differently by different stakeholders and practioners at different levels. Three major discourses can be made out (pragmatic discourse, dynamics discourse, threat discourse), which are characterised by a set of partially overlapping story lines. These discourses are employed by four discourse coalitions (environmental, forest users’, expert, and grass root coalition). As a general rule, debates at the European level are more polarised and politicised, while the local debates on climate change and Natura 2000 remain rather vague and are less polarised. This seems to indicate that the link between climate change adaptation and forest conservation is mostly an issue for an abstract high-level policy debate. At this level, climate change is used to influence well-known policies, and to legitimise distinct interests that were already present before the climate change debate has emerged.

Assessment of coastal protection as an ecosystem service in Europe

Mapping and assessment of ecosystem services is essential to provide scientific support to global and EU biodiversity policy. Coastal protection has been mostly analysed in the frame of coastal vulnerability studies or in local, habitat-specific assessments. This paper provides a conceptual and methodological approach to assess coastal protection as an ecosystem service at different spatial–temporal scales, and applies it to the entire EU coastal zone. The assessment of coastal protection incorporates 14 biophysical and socio-economic variables from both terrestrial and marine datasets. Those variables define three indicators: coastal protection capacity, coastal exposure and human demand for protection. A questionnaire filled by coastal researchers helped assign ranks to categorical parameters and weights to the individual variables. The three indicators are then framed into the ecosystem services cascade model to estimate how coastal ecosystems provide protection, in particular describing the service function, flow and benefit. The results are comparative and aim to support integrated land and marine spatial planning. The main drivers of change for the provision of coastal protection come from the widespread anthropogenic pressures in the European coastal zone, for which a short quantitative analysis is provided.

Mapping the Landscape of EU Environmental Policy: Coherence and Linkages

EU environmental policy is at a critical crossroads with a number of important policy processes and strategic discussions currently underway. They include the adoption of new strategic plans (e.g. on future EU biodiversity policy) and roadmaps (e.g. on resource efficiency); as well as a number of comprehensive reviews of existing legislation such as EU policies on water, chemicals and air quality. Substantial discussions on priorities for spending under the next long-term EU budget are currently taking place as are efforts to take forward the EU’s new economic strategy - the ‘Europe 2020 Strategy’ and related ‘Flagship Initiatives’. In parallel, there are also a number of on-going reform processes in relevant sectoral policies such as energy, transport and agriculture policy. These different processes will have an important influence on the context and scope of EU environmental policy to 2020 and beyond. Given this convoluted and evolving backdrop, a key question concerns the inter-linkages, policy overlaps and omissions created, between different areas of environmental policy itself as well as with relevant sectoral policies. This paper provides an overview of some of the key strategic processes currently underway which are of relevance to or will have an impact on the development of future EU environmental policy. In doing so, it aims to identify some of the main inter-linkages and thematic overlaps between the different documents, the extent to which relevant sectoral documents take into account key environmental considerations, and to draw some initial observations on the overall coherence between the different initiatives.

Political Commitment to Climate Policy Integration at EU Level: The Case of Biodiversity Policy

The extensive literature on policy integration lists many potential enabling and explanatory factors for the level of policy integration on the ground. This paper examines just one of these factors – the phenomenon of political commitment – and applies it to the study of climate policy integration in the EU in four steps. First, I conceptualise “climate policy integration” by drawing on a review of the rich literature on environmental policy integration. Second, I outline the theoretical framework, based on general theories of European integration, used for this study of climate policy integration. Third, I take the case of EU biodiversity policy and discuss its historical development alongside the development of EU climate policy in four time phases. Fourth, I examine statements of political commitment and leadership in the European Council and in the Council of the Environment Ministers during these time periods to establish evidence of political commitment to climate policy integration (and the development of this political commitment). This leads to the finding that political commitment to climate policy integration in the biodiversity sector is slowly developing, but it is a particularly recent phenomenon. The paper concludes with a short summary and recommendations for further research.

Is the Message from Athens Being Heard?

In their 2009 Policy Forum ([ 1 ][1]), B. Walker et al. called for greater interaction among existing institutions to tackle global-scale challenges. In April 2009, leading scientists, politicians, economists, and academics, as well as representatives from European Union Member States, civil society, and business put forward the Message from Athens ([ 2 ][2]): eight key priorities in EU biodiversity policy. Key priority 7 emphasizes the need for integration of the EU nature directives into other policy areas such as agriculture and regional development. The EU directives are an excellent example of the kind of cooperation that Walker et al. were calling for. However, it appears that the message is not being heard by the public at large nor by some leaders. Natura 2000 is the European Union's main policy instrument to address the loss of biodiversity ([ 3 ][3]). It is a network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive and 1979 Birds Directive. Most of the protected land is expected to continue to be privately owned, and ecologically and economically sustainable development is a goal. In Western Europe, planned dredging of the Scheldt River estuary in the Netherlands for the benefit of Antwerp harbor in Belgium puts at risk surrounding foraging and breeding grounds for birds protected under EU legislation. Under the Directives, loss of these Natura 2000 sites requires compensation measures, such as restoration of tidal mudflats. This implies flooding of Dutch agricultural polder land. Debate about the conflicting issues of bird protection and food production has begun to surface in the Dutch press [e.g., ([ 4 ][4])]. The situation is also being seen as a conflict between a distant EU interest and local sacrifice ([ 4 ][4]). The resigning Dutch Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende stated, in an attempt to weaken the EU nature directives ([ 5 ][5]), that “Natura 2000…overshoots the mark” and that public support for nature and biodiversity policy in the Netherlands (an EU member state) was diminishing. Jose Manuel Barroso (President of the EU Commission) replied to the Dutch leader that a review of the directives would not be justified because “economic operators benefit from a stable and predictable legislative framework” and “the inevitable legal uncertainty that would be caused by a review would be likely to slow down the development of existing plans and projects” ([ 5 ][5]). The EU nature directives are supranational and enforceable, working toward a global view on issues that transcend local priorities. Unfortunately, these efforts are misunderstood, unappreciated, or feared, and the economic crisis offers further incentives to brush them aside. However, this directive tool is unique in an international context, as it overrides local interests when global issues are at stake. The EU nature directives strive to integrate conservation with human activity, wherever needed, and a confrontation should not be necessary. Although the strength of the directive tool is clear, the Message from Athens has apparently not been communicated effectively, not even to a political leader in a member state, and the European Union must think hard about how to bridge the divide. 1. [↵][6] 1. B. Walker 2. et al ., Science 325, 1345 (2009). [OpenUrl][7][Abstract/FREE Full Text][8] 2. [↵][9] European Commission, “The Message from Athens” (2009); . 3. [↵][10] European Commission, Natura 2000 Network; . 4. [↵][11] 1. L. O. Fresco , “Het ontpolderingsmodel,” NRC Handelsblad, 13 October 2009. 5. [↵][12] 1. C. Janssen, 2. M. van Lieshout , “Balkenende wilde EU-natuurwet afzwakken,” Volkskrant, 8 January 2010; [www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/article1335678.ece/Balkenende\_wilde\_EU-natuurwet_afzwakken][13]. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-2 [3]: #ref-3 [4]: #ref-4 [5]: #ref-5 [6]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [7]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DScience%26rft.stitle%253DScience%26rft.issn%253D0036-8075%26rft.aulast%253DWalker%26rft.auinit1%253DB.%26rft.volume%253D325%26rft.issue%253D5946%26rft.spage%253D1345%26rft.epage%253D1346%26rft.atitle%253DLooming%2BGlobal-Scale%2BFailures%2Band%2BMissing%2BInstitutions%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1126%252Fscience.1175325%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F19745137%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [8]: /lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzMjUvNTk0Ni8xMzQ1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjU6Ii9zY2kvMzI3LzU5NzIvMTQ1My4yLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ== [9]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [10]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [11]: #xref-ref-4-1 View reference 4 in text [12]: #xref-ref-5-1 View reference 5 in text [13]: http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/article1335678.ece/Balkenende_wilde_EU-natuurwet_afzwakken

Environment: Commission Calls for a Shakeup in EU Biodiversity Policy*

A European Commission conference on biodiversity in Athens has issued a forward-looking message regarding the future biodiversity policy of the European Union. Key findings include the need to improve communication about the loss and its consequences, the importance of thinking about ecosystem protection rather than species protection, and the need to ensure that available funds are indeed channelled towards nature protection projects. Scientists acknowledge that biodiversity is in crisis around the world, and that too little is being done to protect it. Europe has a target date of 2010 for halting biodiversity loss in the EU, and while some progress has been made in halting the decline, the original target is unlikely to be met. The Commission called a conference in Athens to examine ways of improving its performance.

Sustainable development and the ‘governance challenge’: the French experience with Natura 2000

AbstractSustainable development is conceptualized in this paper as a serious challenge for governance structures and processes in nation states. Global and European agreements have placed the inclusion of civil society actors in policy‐making at the heart of the sustainability agenda. This commitment is particularly evident in the Commission's White Paper on Governance and the EU Sustainable Development Strategy. From this perspective, the European Commission has consistently underlined the integral role of dialogue with social partners in any sustainability agenda. In contrast, there is a clear mismatch between these principles of civil society inclusion and policy‐making in France. Long‐standing traditions of meso‐corporatism have struggled to adapt to extending participation to civil society actors. This paper assesses the implementation of sustainable development as civil society inclusion with reference to the French experience in dealing with EU biodiversity policy. It is argued that this governance challenge has effectively presented nation states with an ‘interpretation dilemma’ with regards to sustainable development. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Modelling climate change impacts on species’ distributions at the European scale: implications for conservation policy

The availability of suitable climate space across Europe for the distributions of 47 species chosen to encompass a range of taxa (including plants, insects, birds and mammals) and to reflect dominant and threatened species from 10 habitats was modelled for the current climate and three climate change scenarios using the SPECIES neural network model. The present European distribution was satisfactorily simulated for 45 species, which showed good statistics of fit between observed species’ distributions and derived models. The predicted responses to climate change demonstrate that the distribution of many species in Europe may be affected by climate change, but that the effects are likely to differ between species. The general pattern is of a south-west to north-east shift in suitable climate space, with gains balancing losses for many species. Based on the total change in potential climate space in Europe, the species most sensitive to climate change were Rubus chamaemorus (Cloudberry; negatively affected) and Genista acanthoclada (Hairy greenweed; positively affected). This disparity in species’ response has important implications for EU biodiversity policy as the significance of different countries changes in terms of their future contribution to the conservation of habitats and species.

The dynamics of European Union biodiversity policy: interactive, functional and institutional logics

Adopting a multi-level governance approach, this article explores the interactions between the international CBD regime, the European Union and the member states in relation to biodiversity conservation policy. The European Community signed the UN Convention on Biodiversity in 1992. Between 1993 and 1998 EU biodiversity policy was ad hoc. The 1998 Biodiversity Strategy provides a more strategic response. Early biodiversity conservation efforts were hampered by member state persistent non-compliance with key legislation. Increasingly, however, collective action is the norm, being driven by the functional logic of nature conservation and by the institutional logic of the CBD. However, collective action is none the less constrained by the EU system of environmental governance. The result is a structural stress, which has the cumulative effect of enhancing the complex interdependencies that exist between these multilevel actors.