Natura 2000

Ecosystem service approach

This approach focuses on the contribution of Natura 2000 to the delivery of individual ecosystem services, seeking to quantify and value each service. This is more feasible for some services (carbon storage and recreation, for example) than others (pollination, natural hazards, water purification) given the site-specificity of services and data availability. Also, geographic variations in service delivery make estimation difficult.

Site-based approach

To estimate the benefits at the network level, this approach scales up the benefits estimates that are available for a number of different Natura 2000 sites. It draws on data from a relatively large number of studies (though this is still small compared to optimal) and has the potential to account for the different characteristics of sites and the nature and value of services they deliver.

On the other hand, this way it is difficult to account for wide variations in estimates between sites (unless there is a very large base of data available). It also amalgamates estimates produced using different methods and makes it difficult to know how available estimates relate to the overall characteristics of the network.

Habitat-based approach

Site-based estimates can be used to estimate per hectare values for individual habitats, which are then combined with data on the extent of habitats at the network level, to provide EU-wide estimates. This approach provides a logical basis for upscaling, as similar habitats are likely to deliver similar types of services across the network (although the value of many services varies significantly by location). Data is available on the area of individual Natura 2000 habitats, providing a basis for upscaling.

The downside is that variations in service delivery can be expected within habitats, according to location. It is also difficult to account for a wide range of benefits estimates for certain habitats, and the lack of estimates of benefits of some habitats.

The extension of the common market to the CEE region also brought with it numerous threats to natural assets from increased infrastructure development to intensified agricultural practices. These activities that extract our natural resources while providing us with myriads of benefits endanger species and ecosystem services that should be preserved for our very survival.

Ecosystem services are those goods and services of nature that humans utilise

Human well-being benefits from ecosystem services in numerous different ways. The food we eat, the clean water we drink, fuel, and fibre are direct “presents” of nature. But we also utilise “nature’s services”, which are a result of complex processes and interactions, such as the formation of soil, the natural decomposition of waste, protection from disasters like floods and storms, or the maintaining of a stable climate on earth.

Ecosystem services can be defined in various ways. The United Nations Millennium Ecosystem Assessment classified ecosystem services as follows:

• Supporting services: The services that are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services including soil formation, photosynthesis, primary production, nutrient cycling and water cycling.
• Provisioning services: The products obtained from ecosystems, including food, fibre, fuel, genetic resources, biochemicals, natural medicines, pharmaceuticals, ornamental resources and freshwater;
• Regulating services: The benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes, including air quality regulation, climate regulation, water regulation, erosion regulation, water purification, disease regulation, pest regulation, pollination, natural hazard regulation;
• Cultural services: The non-material benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation and aesthetic experiences – thereby taking account of landscape values.

Source: https://envs.au.dk/en/research-areas/society-environment-and-resources/biodiversity-and-ecosystem-services

Over 4 million people whose jobs depend on the health of ecosystems benefit from the Natura 2000 network that delivers important socio-economic benefits and ecosystem services: air quality preservation, climate change mitigation through carbon storage, natural pollinator conservation, water flow maintenance, food stocks, medicines, tourism and recreation. Nonetheless, these services can be lost easily if we do not address their conservation properly.

By covering both marine and terrestrial sites, supporting the restoration of habitats, and conserving species, Natura 2000 is safeguarding Europe’s natural heritage. According to one study, Natura 2000 brings €200-€300 billion annual benefits, whereas the management and the restoration of the network only cost €5.8 billion a year. Natura 2000 plays a crucial role for the EU to meet its biodiversity and climate commitments under the new Biodiversity Strategy.

Benefits of protected areas include the supply of tangible resources such as water and sustainably produced crops and timber (the ‘provisioning services’ noted above), and processes that, regulate water and air quality, prevent natural hazards such as flooding and soil erosion and mitigate climate change through storing and sequestering carbon (the ‘regulating services’ noted above). Protected areas also provide ‘cultural services’, for example by supporting recreation and tourism, and maintaining cultural identity and sense of place. These services are underpinned by the role that sites play in supporting the preservation of basic ecological processes (e.g. nutrient cycling), fundamental in maintaining the overall functioning of natural systems (the ‘supporting services’ noted above). Healthy and well-functioning ecosystems sustained within protected areas can increase not only the range of ecosystem services but also the resilience of ecosystems to resist and adapt to disturbances (e.g. climate change) also beyond the site level.

Many factors influence ecosystem resilience and the likely extent and rate of changes to ecosystem services. Examples include species abundance, level of biomass, quality and structure of natural habitats, and level of genetic diversity. Some services are directly linked to species’ detailed composition and diversity (e.g. pollination, diverse cultural services); other services depend on the role of physical structures and processes at the ecosystem scale, such as flood regulation.

According to the European Environment Agency, about one-third of the marine species and two-thirds of the marine habitats are in unfavourable conservation status (and for many species and habitats data is missing). Pollution of marine waters, fishing and (unsustainable) harvesting of aquatic resources are the top two pressures on EU waters, threatening marine ecosystems. In the EU, thanks to the establishment of marine Natura 2000 sites, around 10% of the EU maritime area is under protection.

However, there are still large EU maritime areas lacking protection, especially in offshore zones. To fix this, the marine Natura 2000 network must be completed (one of the objectives of the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030). But the challenge goes beyond the establishment of new protected areas: defining conservation objectives and measures for all sites is imperative.

From food provision to climate change mitigation or recreation opportunities, marine Protected Areas and Natura 2000 sites not only contribute to the health of our seas, but they can also be a driver of socio-economic development.

On land, animal and bird species and their habitats have a long research history; Natura 2000 has drawn on this to select and delineate sites for preservation. At sea, the gaps in scientific knowledge create a very different situation. The lack of precise data means that habitat and species selection cannot occur with the precision now achieved inland. Choices depend upon the "best scientific knowledge available" and are validated by the relevant scientific community, as all the marine areas in question lack proper species inventories and habitat profiles.

The lack of knowledge not only impedes objective marine site selection but threatens acceptance by critical stakeholders and decision-makers — commercial and recreational fishermen, other recreational users, energy and resource extraction industries, and local and regional governments. These interested parties had little time to learn about marine site-selection criteria and processes before they faced large transfers to Natura 2000 — e.g. up to 70% of German territorial waters and 40% of French. It is understandable that these stakeholders wonder about the legitimacy of site selections, especially when the choices may affect their livelihoods and remain unsupported by recent maps or species inventories.

In 2012, the European Commission re-launched the Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process to help implement the Natura 2000 network to its full potential, both on land and at sea, and thus to contribute significantly to achieving the objectives of the Nature Directives (Birds and Habitats Directives.

Today, the Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process organises and triggers cooperation between authorities, experts and stakeholders at the scale of 9 terrestrial biogeographical regions and 5 marine biogeographical regions. It involves seminars, workshops and cooperation activities to enhance the effective implementation, management, monitoring, financing and reporting of the Natura 2000 network.

In 2020, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives set targets for protected and strictly protected areas coverage, as well as for the improvement of the conservation status of species and habitats protected under the Nature Directives. The Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process was therefore expanded to support discussions between EU Member States, stakeholders, and experts on the steps to take to meet these new targets.

The European Natura 2000 Award rewards excellence in the management of Natura 2000 sites and showcases the network’s added value of conserving nature for local communities and economies across the European Union. It was launched in 2014 by the European Commission in order to increase EU citizens' awareness of the Natura 2000 network.

The Award, allocated biennially, is open to anyone directly involved in the management of or communication about the EU's Natura 2000 network – businesses, government bodies, NGOs, volunteers, landowners/users, educational institutions, or individuals.

Winners of the European Natura 2000 Award are selected from five different categories, showcasing the best success stories in preserving Europe’s stunning nature:

• Conservation on land - recognising achievements that have improved the conservation status of a particular terrestrial habitat type and/or species. Targeted habitat types or species must be in the Habitats Directive Annex I or II or Birds Directive Annex I or be a regularly occurring migratory bird.
• Marine conservation - recognising achievements that have improved the conservation status of a particular marine or coastal habitat type and/or marine or coastal species. Targeted habitat types or species must be in the Habitats Directive Annex I or II or Birds Directive Annex I or be a regularly occurring migratory bird.
• Communication - recognising communication achievements that led to increased awareness about Natura 2000, and which brought lasting positive changes in attitudes or behaviour towards the network.
• Socio-economic benefits - recognising the creation of socio-economic benefits for local stakeholders resulting from activities linked to a Natura 2000 site such as a Natura 2000 label, nature-based tourism activities, increased revenue for specific stakeholder groups, or creation of new jobs, etc.; and/or conflict resolution efforts that have brought together different stakeholders in a way that has benefitted Natura 2000, focusing on evolution from a polarised situation to an honourable compromise, with mechanisms in place for the various stakeholders to work together.
• Cross-border cooperation - recognising the establishment of effective partnerships between stakeholders involved in the management/conservation of Natura 2000 sites that are aimed at resolving Natura 2000 issues more constructively than would have been the case if the partners had operated individually. Two types of partnerships are concerned by this category: Cross-border collaboration and networking among structures with similar thematic targets

While not a category, the Commission introduced the European Citizens’ Award as a recognition by the public of its favourite finalist. The finalists from all categories are automatically entered into a public vote and the finalist with the highest number of votes wins the coveted Citizens’ Award.

• EUROPARC Federation: Marine Protected Areas & Marine N2000 Sites: from policy to (needed) responses.
• European Commission: The Economic benefits of the Natura 2000 Network. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2013 – 74 pp. – 21 x 29.7 cm. ISBN 978-92-79-27588-3. doi:10.2779/41957
• Gallai, N., Salles, J.M., Settele, J. and Vaissière, B.E., 2009. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological economics, 68(3), pp.810-821.
• Laurent Germain: Extending Natura 2000 to the Seas.
• ten Brink P., Badura T., Bassi S., Daly, E., Dickie, I., Ding H., Gantioler S., Gerdes, H., Kettunen M., Lago, M., Lang, S., Markandya A., Nunes P.A.L.D., Pieterse, M., Rayment M., Tinch R., (2011). Estimating the Overall Economic Value of the Benefits provided by the Natura 2000 Network. Final Report to the European Commission, DG Environment on Contract ENV.B.2/SER/2008/0038. Institute for European Environmental Policy / GHK / Ecologic, Brussels 2011