DIRECTORATE-GENERALENVIRONMENT
Directorate B - Nature, Biodiversity & Land Use
ENV.B.2 - Biodiversity
ENV.B.3 - Nature
CGBN
Co-ordination Group
for Biodiversity and Nature
14thmeeting – 21/03/13 /
Agenda item 8
Recent Studies on Biodiversity Policy
(INFO DOC. 8.3)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
1.1.Science for Environment Policy – In-depth report on Green Infrastructure (2012)
1.2.Green Infrastructure Implementation and Efficiency (2012)
1.3.Integrating nature & biodiversity and land use data (2012)
1.4.Design, Implementation and Cost Elements of Green Infrastructure Projects (2011)
1.5.The assessment of the potential of ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation in Europe (2011)
1.6.Towards a Green Infrastructure for Europe: Integration of Nature 2000 into the wider countryside (2010)
2.INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES
2.1.Assessing and controlling the spread and the effects of common ragweed in Europe
3.INTEGRATION OF BIODIVERSITY INTO SECTORAL POLICIES
3.1.The EU biodiversity objectives and the labour market: benefits and identification of skill gaps in the current workforce
3.2.Background Study towards biodiversity proofing of the EU budget
3.3.A synthesis of approaches to assess and value ecosystem services in the EU in the context of TEEB (expected March 2013)
1.GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
1.1.Science for Environment Policy – In-depth report on Green Infrastructure (2012)
One of the key attractions of Green Infrastructure is its multifunctionality, i.e. its ability to perform several functions on the same spatial area.
This report, focused on identifying applied research surrounding the multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure, considers the different types of function that Green Infrastructure seeks to fulfil and looks at the evidence behind its ability to perform these functions. Firstly it will explore some general issues surrounding the evaluation of GI in terms of defining GI features or elements, identifying comparable costs and benefits, and issues surrounding indicators and multi-level evaluation. Following this general section the report is divided into sections on four ‘types’ of GI functions or ‘roles’:
- Protecting ecosystems state and biodiversity
- Protecting ecosystem functioning and promoting ecosystem services
- Promoting societal well-being and health
- Supporting the development of a green economy and sustainable land and water management.
It will identify some of the GI features that carry out these functions and their costs and benefits, exemplified by case studies. It will also identify any indicators that could be used to monitor the performance of these roles and highlight areas where indicators need to be developed.
1.2.Green Infrastructure Implementation and Efficiency (2012)
Green Infrastructure (GI) is a valuable tool for addressing ecological preservation and environmental protection as well as societal needs in a complementary fashion.
This study assessed the effectiveness and efficiency of policy initiatives to support Green Infrastructure across Europe. It identified the main existing policy measures that can help to support Green Infrastructure initiatives and their implementation, and analysed seven in-depth case studies on thematic issues [ecological networks, multi-functional use of (1) farmlands and forests, and (2) coastal areas, freshwater and wetlands management and restoration, urban Green Infrastructure, grey infrastructure mitigation and Green Infrastructure mapping for spatial planning]. The study further reports on the contribution Green Infrastructure makes to the resilience of ecosystems, and on indicators to measure its impacts. It quantifies impacts on ecosystems and their services, and resulting socio-economic and health benefits. These benefits were compared with costs; and four different policy scenarios on the implementation of Green Infrastructure in Europe were assessed.
1.3.Integrating nature & biodiversity and land use data (2012)
Current assessments of the state of biodiversity in Europe only give limited value for policy making, due to data gaps, unavailability, data inconsistencies or improper use of existing data. The contract examined how to bring existing data collections (in particular CLC, Habitats Directive Art. 17 and LUCAS data) together, and produced a processed database with the results and chosen biodiversity indicators based on the exploration of land use data for biodiversity, ecosystem services and Green Infrastructure. Recommendations on biodiversity data policy have been formulated in support of a gap analysis relevant to the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy. The database has been handed over to EEA.
1.4.Design, Implementation and Cost Elements of Green Infrastructure Projects (2011)
Green Infrastructure (GI) is a valuable tool for addressing ecological preservation and environmental protection as well as societal needs in a complementary fashion. This study developed a definition of Green Infrastructure projects based on terminology and working definitions used in different EU member states and identified a set of European green infrastructure projects and initiatives with a view to operationalise the Green Infrastructure concept and create a typology of GI projects. Thereafter the study analyses green infrastructure projects carried out by EU funds or as national initiatives and provides elements of their design and process used to implement them on the ground, estimates of their cost and benefits, and of their potential to respond to multiple objectives (biodiversity management and enhancement, increasing resilience to climate change, protection against natural disasters, etc). Furthermore, the study reports on the potential of current EU policy(-ies) and available funding instruments to promote green infrastructure projects and provide for the capacities and planning needed to develop and implement them on the ground and provides recommendations for EU, national and regional/local policy makers to take them up when designing Green Infrastructures policies and projects.
1.5.The assessment of the potential of ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation in Europe (2011)
Addressing the effects of climate change via adaptation measures and the implementation of mitigation measures is central to ensuring continued ecosystem functioning, human health and socio-economic security. Ecosystem-based approaches have emerged as a key instrument to confront these concerns across sectors of business and society, offering multiple benefits in a potentially cost-effective manner. The present study aimed to address current knowledge gaps regarding the uptake and implementation of ecosystem-based approaches and thereby gain a better understanding of their role and potential in climate change adaptation and mitigation in Europe. A database of 161 applicable projects, five in-depth case studies, targeted interviews with European Commission officials and a literature review served as the basis for this assessment.
1.6.Towards a Green Infrastructure for Europe: Integration of Nature 2000 into the wider countryside (2010)
A core element of European Green Infrastructure is Natura 2000. In light of this, the Commission has commissioned a study on the integration of Natura 2000 into the wider countryside. The contractor has undertaken an assessment of the trends in land use changes, including a comparison of land use trends with trends in related socio-economic factors, which will allow forecasting of land use intensity in all regions of the EU. The study proposes how to integrate the Green Infrastructure concept into other policy sectors.
2.INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES
2.1.Assessing and controlling the spread and the effects of common ragweed in Europe
The project aimed to synthesise and systematically review information, highlight knowledge gaps and utilise modern modelling methods to achieve: an understanding of the current extent of ragweed infestation in Europe; economic, social and environmental quantification of direct and indirect harmful effects in all sectors; assessment of measures to control ragweed spread and introduction (now and in future climates); and the dissemination of accurate and up-to-date scientifically-based evidence to stakeholders. The contractor achieved these aims by implementing a coordinated project involving a large number of experts from across Europe working on a number of inter-linked tasks.
3.INTEGRATION OF BIODIVERSITY INTO SECTORAL POLICIES
3.1.The EU biodiversity objectives and the labour market: benefits and identification of skill gaps in the current workforce
The objective of the this study is to establish what reaching the biodiversity target would entail with regard to existing and new jobs, as well as ascertaining the kind of skills and competences that will be required. In addition, the study will aim at determining whether the right education and training are being provided today to help Europeans find a job in the near future in protecting Europe's natural capital. It also attempts to determine the benefits of achieving the biodiversity target for the EU Labour's market.
For this study, the areas covered are the following:
(1)Establishment of a catalogue of existing and new types of jobs that
a.are needed for the enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services
b.depend on biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services.
(2)Overview of the current practices in Member States as regards
a.anticipatory assessments on the skills needs in the national labour markets to fulfill jobs related to the enhancement of biodiversity and the natural environment
b.the development of new jobs or related job strategies to face the environmental challenge of the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services.
(3)Applying the major methodologies assessed to some biodiversity related jobs and providing an identification of the skills needs and gaps for those jobs.
(4)Assessing in a qualitative and as far as feasible in a quantitative manner, the benefits and potential drawbacks of achieving the biodiversity targets for the labour market.
(5)Illustrate such potential with concrete examples of practices carried out in a limited number of selected Member States or regions.
The report makes the following recommendations:
There is a need for better evidence on the links between biodiversity and the labour market at both EU and Member State level.
- Better systems to categorise the linkages between biodiversity and the labour market are required.
- Greater efforts are needed to forecast biodiversity skills needs in different Member States and sectors, and would benefit from a refinement of methodological
- A more strategic approach to the training offer is needed if Member States are to make the most of the labour market opportunities in the EU’s biodiversity strategy.
- Jobs and skills issues need to be acknowledged in the biodiversity strategies and action plans of the Member States.
- Member States and the Commission must focus on making better use of EU funds to address the opportunities and needs of biodiversity targets in the labour market, particularly in light of the current fiscal constraints on national budgets.
3.2.Background Study towards biodiversity proofing of the EU budget
Commission's study "Background Study towards biodiversity proofing of the EU budget" examines the opportunities for "Biodiversity-proofing" the EU budget, which is defined in the study as a structured process of ensuring the effective application of tools to avoid or at least minimize harmful impacts of EU spending and to maximise the biodiversity benefits. It applies to all spending streams under the EU budget, across the whole budgetary cycle and at all levels of governance. The study gives recommendations on the first steps and on the entry points of "biodiversity proofing" the EU budget with a focus on the CAP Pillar 1 and 2, ERDF, Cohesion Fund, CEF, TEN-E, TEN-T, EMFF, Horizon 2020 and the LIFE Programme. The study develops the biodiversity proofing tools or entry points from the perspective of the EU, Member States and Regions; it explains where each of these actors could potentially interfere and how they can help the biodiversity proofing process.
The study examined different tools which can facilitate biodiversity-proofing, including ex ante regulatory impact assessments (which should review policy coherence of spending programmes with respect to the EU’s strategic goals and the environmental acquis), spatial planning, environmental selection criteria for projects, strategic and project-level environmental impact assessments, cost-benefit analysis that takes into account ecosystem services values, the setting of environmental targets and indicators, and mid-term and ex post policy evaluations. However, the ‘best frame of actions’ for biodiversity proofing needs to be based on holistic and integrated processes, with interventions at all appropriate stages of the policy cycle. The frameworks should use a coherent mixture of the available tools and biodiversity proofing legislation (Habitats and Birds Directives, Environmental Impact Assessments and Strategic Environmental Assessment).
Most importantly the study suggests that effective biodiversity-proofing is dependent on integration of biodiversity considerations into all relevant EU policies and related instruments at all levels starting from high-level decision making.
3.3.A synthesis of approaches to assess and value ecosystem services in the EU in the context of TEEB (expected April 2013)
The Commission's "TEEB follow-up study for Europe: A synthesis of approaches to assess and value ecosystem services (ES) in the EU" is designed to support EU Member States in their national TEEB implementations. It provides a guide for Member States on how to assess and value their ecosystem services, helping them implement the relevant action in the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020.
The study provides a review of relevant initiatives at MS and EU level (both national and inter-institutional), analyses and synthesizes the different assessment and especially valuation approaches within MS and at EU level, and proposes a common framework and policy recommendations for assessing, valuing and accounting for biodiversity and ecosystems and their services. The recommendations aim to provide guidance rather than being prescriptive for example by leaving the choice to Member States whether to focus on assessing ecosystem services or also on ecosystems and biodiversity and whether to make quantitative or qualitative assessments and monetary or non-monetary valuation.
More specifically, the study outlines a number of choices to be made between alternative methods, approaches and classifications and describes, where possible and relevant, the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative option. Recommendations are presented in this way to allow Member States to choose the information and methods that are of highest relevance to them. The study suggests a multi-level ‘decision tree’, where decisions or choices at previous levels are highly correlated and/or drive decisions or choices at lower levels. The decision tree consists of four main choice levels and key decision issues are described for each stage e.g. choice level 1; "what do you want to achieve", choice level 2; what are the relevant ecosystem services (classification of ES, final and/or intermediary services, role of biodiversity, actual or potential ecosystem services).
Finally the study also addresses choices on reporting natural capital in national accounts and provides a case study example outlining the challenges and lessons learned..
1