Maria Luisa Paracchini

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 .

Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services: Indicators for ecosystem assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020

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.

Ecosystem services classification: a systems ecology perspective of the cascade framework

Highlights • Different ecosystem service definitions and interpretations create too much ambiguity.• The cascade model is used as framework, and Systems Ecology as theoretical basis.• The notions of biomass information and interaction enrich a refreshed conceptualization.• The cascade framework shifts from a ‘two dimensional’ to a ‘telescopic’ perspective.• This perspective can emphasize the ecological dimension and its complex reality.

Exploring restoration options for habitats, species and ecosystem services in the European Union

Summary The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the European Union have set a target of restoring 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020 with the aim of conserving biodiversity and enhancing the supply of ecosystem services. This target must be implemented alongside other similar targets aimed at reducing the number of threatened habitat and species as assessed under the Birds and Habitats directives. However, there are several uncertainties associated with achieving these targets including the benefits of restoring biodiversity and ecosystem services, the contribution required from member states and the effect of different restoration scenarios on target achievement. In this study, we evaluate options that exist for meeting an EU-wide 15% restoration target while conserving habitats and species and enhancing ecosystem services. We explored the effects of different restoration scenarios on the percentage of threatened habitat and species secured. Lastly, we explored the effects of including financial cost into the prioritization procedure. Focusing restoration efforts on habitats with inadequate conservation status in the reporting of the Habitats Directive provides the largest benefit for species and ecosystem services. If the restoration target is set at 10% for habitat and species with inadequate or most threatened conservation status, and at 2% for all ecosystem services, about 18% of EU ecosystems should be restored to meet these targets. When the target is set at 15% of habitat and species and 3% of all ecosystem services, results showed that France hosts the highest percentage of identified priority areas (13%) followed by Spain and Finland with about 11% and Sweden with 9%. However, these numbers change when financial cost is included alongside other criteria, with France containing 35% of all areas identified. Synthesis and applications. These results suggest that to achieve the greatest benefits, funding for restoration should be directed towards habitats with inadequate conservation status rather than to species. Countries with larger areas of threatened habitat and lower restoration costs may offer better opportunities to meet targets, but including cost at the EU level may result in unequal burden sharing among countries.

Weighting and aggregation of indicators for sustainability impact assessment in the SENSOR context

In response to the need for developing methods for evaluating multidimensional problems in sustainability assessment, the scientific literature provides many examples related to the theory and use of composite indicators. In the context of the SENSOR project, dealing with the ex-ante assessment of environmental, social and economic impacts of European policies on multifunctional land use, new constraints and dimensions are added to the exercise. Examples are the need for consistency across European regions and across different scales of analysis; the use of qualitative and quantitative information; the possibility of aggregation to different administrative levels (sensitive areas, Member States, cluster regions, EU); and the correct balancing of the sustainability dimensions.

Development of a pan-European River and Catchment Database

The availability of a European-wide database of consistent and hierarchically structured river networks and associated drainage basins is a major asset for the implementation and follow-up of environmental policies in the European Union and an important basis for international modelling and monitoring activities. In fact, drainage basins are important reference units for many biophysical processes and rivers represent major transport networks not only for water, but also for sediments, nutrients and pollutants.

A European Landscape Stratification Reflecting Drainage Density

The European continent is characterised by a large diversity in landscapes. The distribution, density and pattern of drainage channels (including lakes, wetlands and lagoons) are major characteristics of these landscapes. GIS tools nowadays allow for the combined analysis of digital elevation data and ancillary information in order to derive these characteristics over extended areas.

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 .