Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation
in Dynamic Ecosystems
(RUBICODE)
www.rubicode.net
Integrating ecosystem services into habitat
management and biodiversity policy in Europe
For further information contact John Haslett (email: john.haslett@sbg.ac.at)
or Rob Jongman (email: rob.jongman@wur.nl)
Funded under the European Commission
Sixth Framework Programme
Contract Number: 036890
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
www.rubicode.net
Presentation outline
• Present conservation strategies – Protected Areas and
networks.
• The importance of non-protected areas – Ecosystem service
provision and the wider landscape.
• The example of agriculture and the Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP).
• An in-depth analysis of conservation policy – the views of
stakeholders in France, Germany and Hungary.
• General limitations of present conservation strategies.
• A new framework for conservation in Europe encompassing
ecosystem dynamics and ecosystem service provision.
• Some gaps in present knowledge that still require attention.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Present conservation strategies
www.rubicode.net
• Habitat protection is now
recognised as a prerequisite
for species survival.
• As a result, a continuous,
overlapping spectrum of valid
conservation strategies,
encompassing species and
their habitats, is covered by
present legislation, e.g. Bern
Convention (CoE), Habitats
Directive (EU) & others.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
The established approach relies
on Protected Area (PA)
management
www.rubicode.net
• Protected Areas play a central role in conservation strategies
and policy – many different instruments covering all levels.
• Six IUCN categories of Protected Areas with a gradient of
management intervention to meet different needs in different
situations.
• European Protected Areas are no longer very efficient –
interests and emphasis have changed from PA design and
inventorying to management for sustainable development.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
The Emerald and Natura 2000
network
• The EU Natura 2000 network of Protected Areas forms
part of the wider Emerald Network of the Bern Convention.
Areas are identified by the individual Member States.
www.rubicode.net
• The Natura 2000 network is comprised of Special Bird
Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas of Conservation
(SAC) and Marine Protected Areas (MPA).
• Numbers and sizes of the designated PAs differs greatly
between Member States.
• Integration of the Emerald and Natura 2000 areas into the
wider landscape has not been realised.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
www.rubicode.net
The density of Natura 2000 sites
differs in France and Germany
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
www.rubicode.net
Non-protected areas
• Most land in Europe is not protected and much biodiversity
is outside Protected Areas.
• Organisms disperse naturally across landscapes – the
resulting distribution patterns are important for species
heterogeneity and ecosystem function.
• Large scale management
of non-PA’s may be
helped through the
Landscape Convention.
• Ecological linkages
between PAs are essential,
but not enough by
themselves.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Biodiversity within and outside
PAs also delivers ecosystem
services
www.rubicode.net
Ecosystem services need to be protected together with species
and habitats because:
• They are essential for human
well-being;
• They are a currency to value
ecosystems and promote their
sustainable use;
• They offer a value-added strategy
to supplement presently established
biodiversity conservation.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Biodiversity conservation outside
PAs: Agriculture and the CAP
• Within RUBICODE, CAP analysed in 7 case studies
selected based on the following criteria:
– the approval of the RDPs;
– availability of an English translation;
– maximum diversity (geographical, social and economical).
www.rubicode.net
• Selected countries and regions:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Hungary;
Ireland;
Italy- Veneto;
Lithuania;
the Netherlands;
Sweden;
UK- England.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Agriculture and biodiversity
www.rubicode.net
• Many Red List species depend on grassland.
• Several priority habitats depend on farming.
• High Nature Value (HNV) farmland varies between states
up to 25% in Ireland.
• Less Favourable Areas (LFAs) vary greatly:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Ireland = 75%;
Sweden = 50%;
Veneto = 46%;
Lithuania = 43.5%;
England = 24%;
Hungary, the Netherlands < 10%.
• Natura 2000 areas can also contain farmland:
– Sweden: 110,000 hectares in LFAs designated as Natura 2000;
– 40% of the English LFA is within National Park boundaries.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
No standardisation between
member states
• No commonly agreed definition for ‘rural’.
• EC commission uses the OECD definition.
www.rubicode.net
• According to OECD standards: Sweden is 99% rural, the
Netherlands 0%.
• Most national Rural Development Programmes (RDPs)
provide definitions that suit the national circumstances and
are not comparable.
• HNV is used but a definition is rarely provided nor
statistics addressing HNV farmland.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Second pillar of the CAP
is the basis for RDPs
The second Pillar consists of four axes, namely:
• Axis 1: improving the competitiveness of the agricultural
and forestry sector;
www.rubicode.net
• Axis 2: improving the environment and the countryside;
• Axis 3: the quality of life in rural areas and diversification
of the rural economy;
• Axis 4: Leader, building local capacity for employment and
diversification (EC 1698/2005).
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Threats for farmland biodiversity
Land abandonment
Hungary
xx
Ireland
xx
xx
www.rubicode.net
Sweden
UK: England
xx
x
x
xx
Netherlands
Land use change (other
than agriculture)
x
xx
Italy: Veneto
Lithuania
Intensification
x
x
xx
Please note xx stands for major challenge for farmland biodiversity conservation; x a challenge for biodiversity
conservation, however it is usually limited to a number of areas.
These categorisations were made based on the information provided in the RDPs.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
In-depth Analysis of Nature
Conservation Policies
• 3 countries analysed: France, Germany and Hungary.
• Semi-structured interviews undertaken with key national
stakeholders.
www.rubicode.net
• Analysis of key policy documents.
• Country reports.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Results from the interviews
Biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services:
• Ecosystem services is an important concept to convince
people about the necessity of nature conservation.
• However, it is hard to get “ecosystem service” ideas
accepted.
www.rubicode.net
• Attributing an economic value to natural biological
resources is a good idea.
• Traditional concepts of conservation have a limited
perspective. There is a need for approaches with a wider
spectrum, including temporal and spatial dynamics.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Results from the interviews
www.rubicode.net
Public Participation in Biodiversity Conservation:
• Public participation is recognised as of increasing
importance: “NGOs and also companies, local
governments and professional groups in direct contact
with nature (such as farmers, fishers) as well as the
general public have to be more involved if we want to
change gear”.
• There is an increasing participatory role of NGOs.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Results from the interviews
General priorities:
• To improve the efficiency of bridging scientific knowledge
and policies;
www.rubicode.net
• To set more quantitative targets for nature conservation
(such as for climate change or pesticide reduction);
• To integrate biodiversity conservation into other policy
fields;
• To promote the importance of soil and water protection as
well as species and biotope protection.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Limitations of current
conservation strategies
• Reasons for conservation have been largely aesthetic –
only just starting to include socio-economic aspects.
www.rubicode.net
• Most institutions and instruments assume spatially and
temporally static situations.
• Conservation is considered primarily at human scales,
involving “simple” spatial habitat mosaics.
• Conservation relies heavily on PAs and networks, even
though ecological corridor functioning is still unclear.
• Invertebrates under-represented at all levels.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Framework for integrating ecosystem
services into conservation (part 1)
Human aesthetic,
cultural and moral
values
Species/habitat
protection
www.rubicode.net
Conservation
policy and
management
strategy
Static site-based
PAs & networks
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
ES & conservation framework (part 2)
Ecosystem
service
provision
Societal needs
www.rubicode.net
Human aesthetic,
cultural and moral
values
Management
for sustainable
ecosystem
services
Species/habitat
protection
Conservation
policy and
management
strategy
Sectoral policy
and
management
Static site-based
PAs & networks
Ecosystem
sustainability
and integrity
Conservation within
socio-ecological
systems
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
www.rubicode.net
Gaps in knowledge and practice
that require attention (I)
• A more dynamic approach that takes account of ecosystem
dynamics.
• Managing spatial mosaic heterogeneity must be bound to
temporal change, recognising climate and land use change.
• Nested spatial scales: View habitat mosaics from the
“organism point of view” in addition to human landscape
perspectives.
• Inclusion of invertebrates in habitat management decisions
and legislation – these animals form most biodiversity and
have many essential ecosystem functions and services
across a wide range of scales.
Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems
Gaps in knowledge and practice
that require attention (II)
• Integration of conservation strategies and policy with other
sectors – agriculture, transport, industry, etc.
www.rubicode.net
• Knowledge on balancing the conflicts between economic
service provision and biodiversity conservation.
• Inclusion of the sustainable provision of ecosystem
services within the bounds of management for
conservation would be one way to add value to present
conservation management strategies.