Operational Summary Record of the 12Th Meeting

/ EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GENERALENVIRONMENT
Directorate B - Nature, Biodiversity & Land Use
ENV.B.2 - Biodiversity
ENV.B.3 - Nature
CGBN
Co-ordination Group
for Biodiversity and Nature
12thmeeting – 29/03/12 /

Operational Summary Record of the 12th meeting

of the Co-ordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature (CGBN)

held on 29th March 2012 (Borschette centre, Brussels – 11.00 until 17.30)

Participants (see attached list)

This operational summary record is to be seen in parallel with the supporting documents prepared by the Commission and posted on the CGBN CIRCA site prior to the meeting - site with registered access). All presentations made during the meeting can also be found on the CIRCA site.

Chairs: François Wakenhut (Head of Unit ENV.B.2 "Biodiversity") and Stefan Leiner (Head of Unit ENV.B.3 "Nature")

1)Summary Record of the Previous Meeting (15th November 2011)

The summary record of the previous meeting was approved.

2) Implementation of the Habitats and Birds Directives

a. Latest developments regarding the actions under target 1 of the EU 2020 Biodiversity strategy:

The Commission presented the following progress made (see more details in the presentation on Circa):

-Action 1: Completion of the network:

On site designation, statistics were shown about the completion of the Natura 2000 Network per MemberState stressing in particular recent progress both as regards terrestrial in new MS and in marine areas. Recalling the 2012 deadline for the completion of the network, the Commission reiterated the need to close remaining gaps without further delays.

-Action 2: Management of Natura 2000 sites:

Preparations of the Biogeographical Seminars and workshops for the Boreal, Atlantic and Alpine Regions are under way and further progress was made in the Management Group, with Guidance documents on SAC designation, on Conservation objectives as well as on Natura 2000 Wilderness and Climate Changebeingclose to finalisation.

On Marine issues, the "FAQ document on links between the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Birds and Habitats Directives" and the "Methodologyfor Impact Assessment of Fisheries on Natura 2000" are close to finalisation. Work has started by the Biodiversity, Nature, Water and Marine Units to pursue Target 4, enhance syneregies and streamline reporting procedures across the respective policy areas.

NGOsstressed the importance to also deal with Species in the new Biogeographic seminar process. The Commission reiterated the agreement that species would be dealt with in the context of the discussion on habitat type groups.

It was clarified that the N2000 management group and the Marine Expert Group have an important role in the implementation of Target 1.

-Action 3: stakeholder awareness & involvement and enforcement:

The Commission informed that guidelines documents on "Inland water Transport", "Aquaculture", "Revision of Birds Species Action Plans and Management Plans" and "Cormorants: guidance on derogations" are to be published before the end of the year.

On illegal killing of birds, the roadmap following the Cyprus conference is being developed.

The Commission presented current planned and ongoing activities related to the celebration of the 20th Anniversary of the Habitat Directive and the LIFE programme. There will be 5 main Commission supported events in Denmark, Poland, Bulgaria, Slovenia and Spain and the Key Celebratory Conference will take place together with the Europarc Conference in the HogeKempenNational Park (Belgium), from 22 to 25 October.A Super Alp walk is being organized with the Alpine Convention to cross the Alps (France, Italy, Austria, Slovenia) and have a series of visits of Natura 2000 sites and LIFE projects with journalists using sustainable transport ways.

- Action 4: reporting Nature Directives:

The last meeting of the Habitats Committee adopted the new SDF andagreed to use the new formats and guidelines for both the Birds Directive Article 12 and the Habitats Directive 17 reports. Experts from Member Statesare being trained on these tools and software, the transitional period to start to use the new SDF ends in September.

The results of a questionnaire sent to Member States revealed that most MS who responded have adequate systems for monitoring in place andassured that they will provide their reports on art. 12 BD and art 17 HD on time. The reporting group has developed new ToR which is to be adopted at the next meeting of the Habitats Committee on 26 April.

CGBN members welcomed the ongoing and planned efforts. The work towards streamlining reporting under the different pieces of nature legislation and the difficulty in fulfilling these obligations in the context of diminishing financial and human resources in the Member States were highlighted.

It was highlighted that there are differences in the legal obligations as regards reporting under Art. 12 and 17. NGOs expressed their readiness to cooperate with Member States and support the development of timely and high quality reports.

b. Financing Natura 2000:

The Commission presented the staff working paper "Investing in Natura 2000" that was issued last December. This highlights the cost and benefits of investing in Natura 2000, the new funding opportunities for Natura 2000 presented in different EU financial instruments, and sets out the new finance strategy for Natura 2000, including the importance of developing "Prioritised Action Frameworks"to underpin the funding strategies for the next period.

The new funding strategy for Natura 2000 responds to Target 1 of the EU biodiversity strategy includes which includes and actions to "ensure adequate financing of Nature 2000 sites" as well as "complete the establishment of the Natura 2000 network and ensure good management". This is also becoming increasingly relevant in context of legal implementation as the deadline for SAC designation, which formally triggers the need for pro-active conservation measures, is now becoming overdueInvesting in Natura 2000 is not only about costs and the latest studies show that these are far outweighed bythe benefits of Natura 2000, from ecosystem services, carbon stored, visitors, recreational activities and contribution of Nature to other environmental targets.

The Commission summarised the funding opportunities presented under Commission proposals for main funding instruments. The second pillar of the CAP provides for support in recognition of public goods delivered by Natura 2000, and Structural Funds and the Cohesion Funds are especially important for less develop regions, cross-border territorial cooperation, Natura 2000 as the core element of green infrastructure and climate change mitigation and adaptation from Natura 2000 restoration.The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund also provides opportunities to support management, restoration and monitoring of Natura 2000, promotion of compensation for aquaculture methods compatible with Natura 2000 or promoting involvement of fishermen and other stakeholders, etc.

The future LIFE is proposed to continue to be a strategic tool to support Natura 2000 with an objective of bringing 15% of Natura 2000 sites into adequate management and 25% of habitats and species targeted by LIFE projects improved status. Life+ will continue developing best practices on supporting Natura 2000, especially via integrated project, for which prioritised action frameworks will be a valuable tool.

Prioritised Action Frameworks (PAFs) are legally foreseen under Article 8 of the Habitat Directive. They are intended as a strategic planning tool for Natura 2000 financing to identify key priorities and provide an integrated overview of how to achieve them having regard todifferent opportunities under EU funds. As such they should assist MS with partnership contracts for the funds covered by the Common Strategic Framework. The aim is to ensure consistency of financing of Natura 2000 under relevant EU programmes with the PAFs, which will not be a substitute for specifying Natura 2000 funding needs under the relevant instruments.

The Commission underlined other actions to improve uptake of funds for Natura 2000, such as improving understanding of the management needs of the sites, sharing of experience and expertise on key sectors such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries and Natura 2000, strengthening links on key issues such as climate change and Natura 2000. There is also ongoing work on improving recognition of the benefits of investments in Natura 2000 areas. Natura 2000 is also a core element of the future green infrastructure.

Key challenges over the coming period for the future were presented including ensuring that the opportunites for funding Natura 2000 are retained or strengthened by Council and Parliament. There will be a need to ensure recognition of Natura 2000 financing and the PAF in the Common Strategic Frameworks and Partnership Agreements developed for instruments under shared management. To optimise the influence of the PAFs on the next funding cycle the Commission asked that the first versions of the PAFs be submitted to it by MS by the end of 2012.

The Commission staff working paper on financing was welcomed by delegates. It is recognised that the key challenge is how to strengthen the uptake of funds for Natura 2000 in different instruments as well as having a strong LIFE instrument to support Natura 2000. Difficulties in using funds under different sectoral instruments were highlighted and several delegates highlighted some risks, including in relation to measures and administrative burdens under the CAP. The Commission asked delegates to inform it of any particular problems that they have identified in this regard.

The use of the PAFs as a planning tool in this regard has broad support. However, issues raised in discussion included when PAF format would be approved, whether they would be formally adopted by Commission, how PAFs will be used by the Commission and the links of PAFs to funding instruments. The Commission clarified that the format for the PAF will be presented to the Habitats Committee in its April meeting for its approval. It was not envisaged that there will be formal adoption of the PAFs. The way for final approval for funding Natura 2000 will be through relevant operational programmes, for which there should be consistency with PAFs. The Commission will use the PAFs in its evaluation of draft operational programmes submitted by Member States. The Commission strongly urged Member States to make early progress and to liaise with colleagues in other sectors with regard to relevant operational programmes.

3)Biodiversity Policy

a.Update of the Common Implementation Framework (CIF) and next steps:

The Danish Presidency presented the format of the next Biodiversity and Nature Directors' meeting (BNDM) in May: it will be a 2 day-meeting, preceded by an excursion and a celebration of the 20th anniversary of the Habitats Directive and LIFE programme on 21st May. The first meeting day will be focusing on implementation issues (legal enforcement, financing) and open to NGOs. The first day will end with an exchange of views with NGOs on the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. The second day will be a closed session for BND only. The detailed programme will be sent as soon as possible. Letter to Minister and Commissioner on NGO involvement will be replied soon.

The Commission summarised the main issues raised at the closed session of this CGBN meeting:

• To focus the discussions of theBiodiversity and Nature Directors on 1) thevalidation of the principles of the CIF, 2)the form of the outcomes of BNDMs (i.e.recommendation/validation/guidance/etc.) and 3) on the strategic links with CGBN, the limits of the CIF mandate and the frame of the multi-annual work plan(2012-2014) to be developed;
• The need to make explicit in the CIF the role of CGBN towards the working groups;
• The inclusion of some organisational arrangements (e.g. documents to be available 2 weeks in advance) and alignment between the text and the annex of the document.

The representatives of the NGOs, while understanding the need for closed session for Member States, highlighted the constructive contribution that they can play and the need to ensure a real dialogue is taking place with BNDs.

Target 3 on agriculture and forestry is one of most difficult target to implement in the Strategy. It is therefore crucial to identify an adequate forum for ensuring its implementation with appropriate chairmanship and membership. Maybe some ad hoc meetings of the Agri-Environment Correspondents' Group would be needed or back-to-back with agri-environment experts.

Concerning the working relationship between CGBN and working groups, it was agreed that CGBN will review outputs of the work undertaken in the working groups. Also, CGBN members will be put in copy of all formal invitations to CIF working group meetings; they will have access to the WG circa sites. However, this will only be for the information of CGBN members and not to be interpreted as additional call for participation.A calendar with the dates of the working group meetings under the CIF will be regularly updated, uploaded on circa and notified to CGBN members. This kind of working relation will be made explicit in both CIF document and WG terms of reference. These final mandates of WGs under the CIF will be shared with CGBN members.

The need to ensure that the discussion documents will be available two weeks in advance to the meetings of CGBN and BNDM will also be made explicit in the revised CIF document.

The following conclusions were drawn:

• for CGBN and BND meetings to ensure a right balance between both a constructive dialogue involving key stakeholders and Member States, and an own space for governments to have an informal dialogue.
• the need for identifying the right governance structure for the implementation of Target 3 on agriculture as the group initially identified (Agri-Environment Correspondents' Group) is not ideal in its current form to cater for the Strategy needs.
• for ENV to finalise the CIF document with latest amendments proposed (e.g. working procedure between CGBN and working groups, multiannual work plan and calendar of group meetings within CIF) and forward to Biodiversity & Nature Directors for validation at their next meeting.

b. Implementation of target 2 of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy:

The Commissiongave a presentation on Target 2 as introduction of the discussion paper distributed in advance of the meeting (Doc. 3-1). This factual presentation will need to be followed by a strategic discussion on the 15% restoration target and definition of degraded ecosystems.

During the discussion, Member States stressed the political importance of Target 2, which is the second most important pillar besides N2K and innovative instruments of the nature and biodiversity policy. This new approach has a lot of potential but also severe limitations.

Also, target 2 has strong links with some of the Aichi targets and the global Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, 2011-2020. It is therefore necessary to carefully agree on what we are going to do and by when (cf. Council conclusions) and to exchange experience on these new issues.

The compilation of actions and studies undertaken by the Commission is very useful but there is a need to restructure the approach according to the interlinkages and timing of studies deliveries. Also the hierarchy of actions as adopted for impact assessments (i.e. avoid, reduce and remedy significant adverse effects) should be better stressed in the No Net Loss and offsetting initiatives.

The terms of reference of the newly created working groups will need to be examined by the CGBN as discussed within the CIF. Some technical issues, such as the categorisation and classification of ecosystems and services will also need to be overseen by CGBN. The difficulty to access some of the dedicated circa sites was also raised.

On Green Infrastructure, the key role played for species migration is not mentioned in the paper.

A glossary explaining specific terms (e.g. ecosystem services, no net loss, state versus status) will be needed, and distinction should be made within and outside N2K to align with the terms of the directive.

The Commission acknowledged the current paper wasnot designed for a strategic discussion but for supporting the technical work of the dedicated working groups. The Biodiversity and Nature Directors will get a set of strategic questions to be prepared by the Commission and the Presidency. More concrete examples will also be needed (e.g. how to operationalise Green Infrastructure, cost of Target 2) to raise political attention.

The representatives from the NGOs had both comments on process and on strategic issues. Target 2 is related to several Aichi targets (e.g. Aichi Target 5 on halving the rate of loss of natural habitats and reducing fragmentation not mentioned). They also pointed out that the financing needs of target 2 should be linked to the multi-annual financial framework in the chart. On the work on mapping and assessment of ecosystems and services, they had difficulty to grasp the link between mapping and ecosystem functionality and resilience (e.g. pollination is a mobile service). The transboundary issues are missing in the document. The Steering Group on mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems & Services (MAES) will need to be mentioned as well as the working group.

The paper will be revised by the Commission and include the following elements:

• inclusion of a reference to MAES Steering Group;
• 'state' and'status' to be aligned;
• transboundary and migratory issues to be highlighted;
• glossary of technical terms to be added;
• working procedure between the working groups and the CGBN will be explicitly included in the terms of reference of the groups as agreed under the CIF and will be circulated to CGBN;
• sequencing of the work will be added according to timing and interlinkages of deliveries.

At the Biodiversity and Nature Directors meeting in May, a first orientation debate on the 15% restoration target would be useful to launch in the context of the Aichi targets.

c. Implementation of target 4 of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy – interface with marine strategy framework directive implementation strategy:

The Commission presented work interface between the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

An important milestone is the long term vision developed in December 2011 by the Marine Directors building upon existing processes such as the INSPIRE Directive and EMODnet developed by MARE within WISE-marine.