Jan-Erik Petersen

Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services: An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020

In the EU, many ecosystems and their services have been degraded 1,2 . Target 2 focuses on maintaining and enhancing ecosystem services and restoring degraded ecosystems by incorporating green infrastructure in spatial planning. This will contribute to the EUs sustainable growth objectives and to mitigating and adapting to climate change, while promoting economic, territorial and social cohesion and safeguarding the EUs cultural heritage. It will also ensure better functional connectivity between ecosystems within and between Natura 2000 areas and in the wider countryside. Target 2 incorporates the global Aichi target 15 agreed by EU Member States and the EU in Nagoya to restore 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020. It is also a direct response to Aichi targets 2 and 14 of the Global Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, 2011-2020 of Convention of Biological Diversity 3 .

Which habitats of European importance depend on agricultural practices

The aim of this paper is to identify the habitat types listed in the Habitats Directive Annex I that require low-intensity agricultural management for their existence. We assessed the link between the Annex I habitat types and agricultural practices in order to identify habitat types that depend on the continuation of agricultural practices or whose existence is prolonged or spatially enlarged via blocking or reducing the secondary succession by agricultural activities. 63 habitat types that depend on or which can profit from agricultural activities—mainly grazing and mowing—were identified. They are classified into 2 groups: (1) habitats fully dependent on the continuation of agricultural management; (2) habitats partly dependent on the continuation of agricultural management. This paper also briefly discusses habitat types for which either doubts remain on their dependence on agricultural management, or the relation to extensive farming practices exists only in part of their area of distribution in Europe or under certain site conditions, respectively. Assessments of the conservation status of habitats of European Importance by 25 EU Member States in 2007 showed that habitats identified by us as depending on agricultural practices had a worse status than non-agricultural habitats.

Chapter 2: High Nature Value farmland and traditional agricultural landscapes: Open opportunities in the development of rural areas

Agriculture is shaping most of the European landscapes. Its activities started about 8,000 years ago and spread until it reached its maximum extension and covered half of the European territory. Agricultural land covers half of Europes territory. In the European context the development of farming traditions is strongly interlinked with the development of human culture. People have spread across the continent adapting habits and agricultural practices to local climatic and geographical conditions, and subsequently adapting them for their own subsistence. This chapter deals with the wild flora and fauna or wildlife and habitats in the terminology adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Furthermore, a distinction is made between species diversity within the agricultural system and the contribution to overall species diversity at a higher spatial scale, including the effects of agriculture on surrounding natural systems. Keywords: agriculture; Convention on Biological Diversity; Europe; European landscapes; human culture

Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services indicators for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020: 2nd report - final, February 2014

Environment Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Summary The second MAES report presents indicators that can be used at European and Member States level to map and assess biodiversity, ecosystem condition and ecosystem services according to the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES v4.3). This work is based on a review of data and indicators available at national and European level and is applying the MAES analytical framework adopted in 2013.

Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. Indicators for ecosystem assessment under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 : 2nd report - final, February 2014

Environment Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Summary The second MAES report presents indicators that can be used at European and Member States level to map and assess biodiversity, ecosystem condition and ecosystem services according to the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES v4.3). This work is based on a review of data and indicators available at national and European level and is applying the MAES analytical framework adopted in 2013.

Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services - An analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action 5 of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020

In the EU, many ecosystems and their services have been degraded 1,2 . Target 2 focuses on maintaining and enhancing ecosystem services and restoring degraded ecosystems by incorporating green infrastructure in spatial planning. This will contribute to the EUs sustainable growth objectives and to mitigating and adapting to climate change, while promoting economic, territorial and social cohesion and safeguarding the EUs cultural heritage. It will also ensure better functional connectivity between ecosystems within and between Natura 2000 areas and in the wider countryside. Target 2 incorporates the global Aichi target 15 agreed by EU Member States and the EU in Nagoya to restore 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020. It is also a direct response to Aichi targets 2 and 14 of the Global Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, 2011-2020 of Convention of Biological Diversity 3 .