eeb and eu biodiversity policy - warsaw '08

EEB and EU Biodiversity Policy

The EEB biodiversity The EEB biodiversity working group working group

EEB Capacity building workshopWarsaw, 2-3 September

Paula SilvaMember of the biodiversity working groupEEB Board memberQuercus (Portugal)

Current situation

Biodiversity is today still rapidly declining, in the EU and worldwide. Despite 18 % of EU surface is under Natura 2000, landscapes are changing, with impacts on ecossistems and species.

Many native species still threatned, including 42% mammals, 15% birds, 45% butterflies, 30% dos anphibians, 45% reptiles and 52% fish of inland waters.

The EEA’s fourth pan-European Assessment showed that more than 700 European species are currently under threat, while the number of invasive alien species in the pan-European region continues to increase.

Current situation

Globally, this decline is one of the most serious environmental threats, comparable to climate change and soil degradation.

The UN-supervised Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005) made an inventory of the world’s ecosystems. Main conclusions:

Many ecosystems are in steady decline, with far-reaching consequences for humanity. (...) some negativeconsequences can be mitigated but only if significantchanges in policies, institutions and practicestake place.

Current situation In the EU, many of the policy responses identified by the MEA

are in place in the form of EU legislation:

The Habitats Directive, the Birds Directive, the Water Framework Directive and the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directives have proven to be major drivers for positive change.

The Environmental Liability Directive should also play a similar role for biodiversity.But…

these Directives are often poorly implemented and their requirements not enforced. Closing this enforcement gap should be given the highest priority.

Halting the loss of Biodiversity

“Halting the loss of Biodiversity by 2010 - and beyondSustaining ecosystem services for human well-being”

Under the Irish Presidency, the EC published in Spring 2006 its communication:

Biodiversity Communication 2006& Action Plan

10 priority objectives:

protect most important habitats and species; actions in the wider countryside and marine environment; making regional development more compatible with nature; reducing impacts of invasive alien species; effective international governance; support to biodiversity in international development; reducing negative impacts of international trade; adaptation to climate change; strengthening the knowledge base.

Four supporting measures needed:

Adequate financing, Strengthening EU decision-making, Building partnerships and promoting

public education, Awareness and participation.

Biodiversity Communication 2006& Action Plan

The EU Commission websitehttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/index_en.htm



What is the EEB doing?

Intensive contacts with the European Institutions. EEB's policy officer Pieter de Pous also coordinates the EEB wg on biodiversity, prepares documents, etc.

The Biodiversity wg consists of experts and specialists from the EEB’s member organisations.

Biodiversity overlaps frequently other areas. We work with other wgs of the EEB, such as the Water wg; Soil wg, Agri wg, etc.

The EEB also works with other organizations, platforms or coallitions, such as the EHF, Countdown2010, WWF, etc.

What is the EEB doing?

Work outputs can be joint letters, press releases, campaigns, reports to influence processes, publications, seminars, etc.

Advocacy support in some major case-studies (Via Baltica, Sabor Waterdam...).

Resource website:www.eeb.org/complaints_database/complaints.php

Data base to make information sharing easier (to be finalized).

Key issues

The key challenge now for the EEB and other NGOs is to

monitor the implementation of the EU “Biodiversity Action

Plan” and to hold governments to their commitment.

• Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010

• Implementing the Habitat and Birds Directives

Implementing the Habitat and Birds Directives

Working Group members monitor progress

Present developments:National Reports on implementation of HD

Habitats Directive – Art. 17 reports

What is “Article 17 Reporting”?

• Implementation reporting under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC): “is the directive working?”

• Relevant provisions: Art. 11: obligation to survey the conservation status of habitats/species

Art. 17: implementation report every 6 years

Habitats Directive – Art. 17 reports

Report Summary E.g. Poland

Role of NGOs?

Mobilise experts & participate in consultation on draftbiogeographic results in August/Sept. 2008

Make use of final results

Support to national monitoring efforts (2013 report shouldbe based on established monitoring systems)

Input in discussions in new Expert Group on Reporting viathe European Habitats Forum & Art.17 follow-up

HD – Art.17 reports

Reports under public consultation from 28th Julytill 15 September at:

http://biodiversity.eionet.europa.eu/article17

http://biodiversity.eionet.europa.eu/article17

Halting the loss of biodiversityOn-going challenges & new topics

Biofuels Climate Change and Adaptation Financing NC - Habitat Banking; Business

and Biodiversity... Policy integration - Transport planning;

CAP; Forestry... Alien species

Biodiversity protection stands or falls with the success with which it is integrated into those sectors which are the biggest drivers of biodiversity loss.

Recent work done by NGO’s has looked at two of these sectors in more detail, agriculture and transport infrastructure, and assessed how far integration has really gone.


Europe’s coming closer to 2010, the year that its head of state committed themselves they would have halted the loss of biodiversity.

A discussion will need to take place over the next two years about the strengths and weakness of the current biodiversity policy framework, and framework after 2010.


Discussions about biodiversity policy post 2010 will also focus on how to better value the services that functioning ecosystems provide and factor this value into everyday decision making.

New instruments such as habitats banking should be carefully evaluated.


Adaptation to climate change will become increasingly important politically and is likely to create another impetus for ecosystem protection;

Ecosystems are impacted by climate change but also act as a buffer to climate change provided they are sufficiently resilient.


Biodiversity Working Group meeting8 June, Brussels

AgendaEEB office, Boulevard Waterloo 34

Agenda Sunday June 8

Dinner at “Le Belgobelge” 20.00

Should the EU have a forest policy? – Tapani?17.00

New EEB publication on Habitats Directive and ecological networks?

15.00

Biodiversity policy post 2010 – discussion on ways to strengthen biodiversity protection

14.00

Planning ahead

Lunch13.00

Link to water policy, blue print for water - Pieter12.30

Biofuel policy update – Pieter11.15

Research on Organic Farming – Anamarija Slabe10.15

Welcome and introduction to the agenda, update from last meeting’s minutes - Pieter10.00

EEB Biodiversity WG meeting

EEB Biodiversity Seminar Agenda Monday June 9

Conclusions17.30

Insights into the ‘Sukhdev report’ – Patrick ten Brink IEEP (confirmed)

16.30*

The pro’s and con’s of habitat Banking – introduction by Dr Frank Waetzold (confirmed) and Astrid van Teeffelen (confirmed) followed by discussion

15.00*

Policy implications from Article 17 reports – Angelika Rubin, DG Environment (confirmed)

14.00

Future of biodiversity policy after 2010

Lunch13.00

TEN-T versus N2000 study – Pieter12.30

Adaptation to Climate Change – DG Environment, Karin Zaunberger (confirmed)

11.30

Coffee break11.15

Finding best practices in Financing Natura 2000 – Andreas Baumueller WWF EPO

11.00

CAP Health Check proposals and biodiversity – introductory analysis by Ariel Brunner, BirdLife International

9.45

Biodiversity Policy Integration

Welcome and introduction to the agenda – Pieter de Pous9.30

BIOFUELS Biofuels...agrifuels or

“biasedfuels”?

Biofuels: latest developments

Letter to “Member of the ad hoc working group on sustainability criteria for biofuels”:

Ensure significant GHG savings of at least 60% compared with the EU’s current average fuel mix to apply immediately

Provide adequate protection for highly biodiverse and high carbon stock areas.

Include mandatory social standards based upon international conventions and agreements.

Secure the application of sustainable agricultural practices, including measures for the protection of water and soil.

Provide a clear definition of implementation procedures. Enable the application of stronger rules. Adequately address indirect land-use change effects.

Title First Name Last_Name Comments For lower target for second gen fuelsfor 10% unclear

Mr. Claude Turmes

Mr. Jorgo Chatzimarkakis xMr. Giles Bryan Chichester UK scpetical on Biofuels xMrs Lena Ek supports 10% target and wants to include peat x

Mrs Fiona Jane Hall xMr. David Hammerstein Mintz x

Mrs Rebecca Harms xMrs Erna Hennicot-Schoepgesasks for 8% and regular reviews xMr. Werner Langen shadow; industry lobbyist xMrs Anne Laperrouze ?? x

Mrs Eluned Morgan xMrs Angelika Niebler chair of the committee; industry lobbyist xMrs Mechtild Rothe asks for 2% second generation xMr. Paul Rübig confused about rail transport x

Mrs Britta Thomsen xMr. Nikolaos Vakalis ask for 4% by 2015 and no target yet for 2020 xMrs Dorette Corbey for 3% second generation, her position improving xMrs Avril Doyle xMrs Satu MaijastiinaHassi xMr. John Purvis UK government scpetical on biofuels xMr. Johannes (Hannes)Swoboda asks for 7% xMrs Pilar Ayuso asks for 2% second generation x

European Parliament Rapporteur for the Directive. On our side and wants the target dropped. He is leading what is known in Parliament as the Turmes report. wants industry selfregulation on sustainability criteria, Shadow on Cars - not good at all, link with Biofuels: supercredits for flexifuel cars (less efficiciency - more biofuels)

shadow; supports 10%, but asks for 20% increase of energy efficiency in transport by 2020 (50% would be easy in reality)

very good Parlamentarian - tough on cars, against subsidising biofuels

progressive on GHG and risk adder, but unlcear on target

shadow; supports 10% and 2% second generation

Lobbying the MEPs (Members of the Eu. Parliament)Renewable Energy Directive

Adaptation toclimate change

...Integrity, coherence andconnectivity

Climate change - EU

Adaptation to Climate Change

June 2007 - Green Paper* on "Adaptation to climate change in Europe - options for EU action" * first policy document on adapting to the impacts of climate change.

On going the preparation of a white paper; EU funding of some research projects (BRANCH, others).

Most vulnerable areas identified: water, health and biodiversity, tourism and agriculture.


AdaptationEcosystems and biodiversity Climate change will affect ecosystems, natural capital, biodiversity and

the flow of ecosystem services in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems.

Healthy ecosystems will be more resilient to climate change and so more able to maintain the supply of ecosystem services . ‘Conventional' pressures that cause the fragmentation, degradation, over-exploitation and pollution of ecosystems must be reduced - 'ecosystem climate-proofing'.

Profound impacts on the physical and biological components of ecosystems: water, soil, air and biodiversity. EU legislation and policies in place or in the pipeline will need to be implemented on schedule but a changing climate could undermine past and present efforts. Policies may need further adjustment.

Integrity, coherence and connectivity of the Natura 2000 network; conserving and restoring biodiversity and ecosystem services; making regional and territorial development compatible with biodiversity; reducing the undesirable impacts of invasive alien species.

Sustainable use - compensatory measures might be important to ensure that development projects preserve the natural capital. Comprehensive cost/benefit analysis and impact assessments should gradually and systematically internalise the environmental costs of declining ecosystems.

Adaptation& Natura 2000

Natura 2000 will be acentral element to mitigate and adaptto climate change. One can say thatconservation of biodiversity is our lifeinsurance for the future.

(quote Commissioner Dimas)

Transport Planning and Biodiversity

Trans-European Transport Network

(TEN-T)

TEN-T: Threat to Natura 2000

379 SPAs ≡ 8.0% of all the SPAs in the EU25 +

935 Sites / potential sites of Community Importance (SCIs/pSCIs) ≡ 4.4% of all SCIs/pSCIs in the EU25

“Priority Projects” (PPs) are the tip of the ‘TEN-T iceberg’. Implementation of the whole TEN-T network could have much more severe impacts, both on individual sites and on Natura 2000 network coherence.

Likely to be affected by the 21 TEN-T Priority Projects analyzed

TEN-T and Natura 2000 bad and good examples

Ten-T and Natura 2000 - Pl Construction of Augustow Bypass in Poland threatens

the pristine Rospuda Valley wetlands within Natura 2000.

Lack of proper consideration of biodiversity during the planning of this project > European Court of Justice.

Ten-T and Natura 2000 - Pt Castro Verde has already been damaged by construction

of the road element of PP8 Multimodal axis Portugal/Spain-rest of Europe

Ten-T and Natura 2000Solving the conflicts

More recommendations and whole study at:www.birdlife.org/eu/ten-t.html

Strong mechanism to resolve TEN-T and Natura 2000 conflicts needed – Commission inter-departmental Coordination Group on Biodiversity.

High level Natura 2000 coordinator needed to ensure integration of Natura 2000 with other policy areas including TEN-T

Voluntary initiatives Business and Biodiversity

Other

Business & Biodiversity

Business and Biodiversity High level conference. Lisbon, 2007

International Conference on B&B.Bonn, 2008

COP 9 of CBD and German initiative

EC platform on B&B?

http://countdown2010.net/business

B&B - High level Conference in Lisbon (Nov. 2007)

EEB members and B&B

Triateral project with 3 NGOs(Pt, Ger, Slo): www.business-biodiversity.org

CEE Web for Biodiversity (Hungary): www.ceeweb.org/BB/BB_in_general.htm

EEB members and B&B

The Lisbon declaration of ENGOsThe Lisbon declaration of ENGOs

BUSINESS AND BIODIVERSITY PERSPECTIVES FROM NGOS

Side event to COP9 – Bonn, the 28th May

The NATURA 2000 PARTNER award scheme

Rewarding the title 'NATURA 2000 PARTNER' to public or private institutions or organisation, communes, cities, NGOs, enterprises, farms, land owners, tourism/recreation bodies, etc...

...that have a particular merit in the management of and the communication on Natura 2000 sites.

Selection of 'NATURA 2000 PARTNERS' on a yearly basis

The title will be awarded by the EC and selected out of the NATURA 2000 PARTNERS designated by the national authorities.

Expected to become operational as from 2009.

Habitat Banking

Pro’s and Con’s

51

Tradable permits - Idea

Ecological value in a region is fixed;

One land parcel (habitat) can be economically developed if a conservation banking credit equivalent to the ecological value of thi piece of land is handed in to an authority

Conservation banking credits can be generated through the development of new or upgrading of existing habitat

Credits can be traded which allows a market to emerge

52

Advantages

US Conservation (and Wetland) Banking

Advantages are mostly seen compared to the previous case-by-case mitigation policyBecause conservation banks are established ahead of project impacts on species there is no temporal loss of habitatsConservation banking allows better integration of restored habitat in existing networks (previously parcels scattered over landscape) which is ecologically valuablePutting new parcels in networks also allows bettermanagement, monitoring and enforcement

53

Problems and pitfalls

Early experience with wetland mitigation banking showed the following problems:

Failure to implement mitigation Mitigation sites too small to be ecologically sustainable Absent or insufficient management of the mitigation site after a

credit was given (including funding for it) Faulty engineering/construction of habitat No contingency plan or funding for unexpected events (e.g. invasive

species, natural catastrophes) Lack of support for mitigation site from community which leads

to vandalism, dumping, off-road vehicle use, etc. A teething problem with Conservation Banking were also

long- lasting procedures with regulatory authorities.

Economics of Biodiversity

Sukhdev Report

G8 Potsdam meeting - global study on 'The economic significanceof the global loss of biological diversity'

'The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity'. By Mr Pavan Sukhdev

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/index_en.htm

eeb and eu biodiversity policy - warsaw '08

News & Politics