15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Realising the potential of Natura 2000 to achieve EU conservation goals as 2020 approaches

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In the last decades the EU has made substantial efforts implementing conservation strategies to halt biodiversity loss. However, little improvement has been reported. Given the proximity of the 2020 landmark set by the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Convention for Biological Diversity, alternatives to reduce this conservation gap and prospect future strategies must be assessed urgently. Here, we explore how the current Natura 2000 could be used to enhance management of terrestrial and freshwater threatened vertebrates. We identified Natura 2000 sites to increase the coverage of threatened species as target species under two alternative scenarios: a policy-driven approach including only threatened vertebrates listed in the Directives; and a conservation-driven approach, including all the remaining threatened vertebrates. We show that representation of threatened vertebrates in Natura 2000 could be improved by updating lists of target species in less than 1% and 3% of sites in the policy-driven and conservation-driven scenarios, respectively. We highlight the strength of Natura 2000, with sites that complement each other and could contribute to achieving more ambitious conservation targets under future strategies. Prioritisation exercises like this could help realise the potential of this network and enhance the management of threatened species and improve current gaps.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Between-country collaboration and consideration of costs increase conservation planning efficiency in the Mediterranean Basin.

          The importance of global and regional coordination in conservation is growing, although currently, the majority of conservation programs are applied at national and subnational scales. Nevertheless, multinational programs incur transaction costs and resources beyond what is required in national programs. Given the need to maximize returns on investment within limited conservation budgets, it is crucial to quantify how much more biodiversity can be protected by coordinating multinational conservation efforts when resources are fungible. Previous studies that compared different scales of conservation decision-making mostly ignored spatial variability in biodiversity threats and the cost of actions. Here, we developed a simple integrating metric, taking into account both the cost of conservation and threats to biodiversity. We examined the Mediterranean Basin biodiversity hotspot, which encompasses over 20 countries. We discovered that for vertebrates to achieve similar conservation benefits, one would need substantially more money and area if each country were to act independently as compared to fully coordinated action across the Basin. A fully coordinated conservation plan is expected to save approximately US$67 billion, 45% of total cost, compared with the uncoordinated plan; and if implemented over a 10-year period, the plan would cost approximately 0.1% of the gross national income of all European Union (EU) countries annually. The initiative declared in the recent Paris Summit for the Mediterranean provides a political basis for such complex coordination. Surprisingly, because many conservation priority areas selected are located in EU countries, a partly coordinated solution incorporating only EU-Mediterranean countries is almost as efficient as the fully coordinated scenario.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Using species distribution models to inform IUCN Red List assessments

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Protected area connectivity: Shortfalls in global targets and country-level priorities

              Connectivity of protected areas (PAs) is crucial for meeting their conservation goals. We provide the first global evaluation of countries' progress towards Aichi Target 11 of the Convention on Biological Diversity that is to have at least 17% of the land covered by well-connected PA systems by 2020. We quantify how well the terrestrial PA systems of countries are designed to promote connectivity, using the Protected Connected (ProtConn) indicator. We refine ProtConn to focus on the part of PA connectivity that is in the power of a country to influence, i.e. not penalizing countries for PA isolation due to the sea and to foreign lands. We found that globally only 7.5% of the area of the countries is covered by protected connected lands, which is about half of the global PA coverage of 14.7%, and that only 30% of the countries currently meet the Aichi Target 11 connectivity element. These findings suggest the need for considerable efforts to improve PA connectivity globally. We further identify the main priorities for improving or sustaining PA connectivity in each country: general increase of PA coverage, targeted designation of PAs in strategic locations for connectivity, ensuring permeability of the unprotected landscapes between PAs, coordinated management of neighbouring PAs within the country, and/or transnational coordination with PAs in other countries. Our assessment provides a key contribution to evaluate progress towards global PA connectivity targets and to highlight important strengths and weaknesses of the design of PA systems for connectivity in the world's countries and regions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                virgilio.hermoso@gmail.com
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                6 November 2019
                6 November 2019
                2019
                : 9
                : 16087
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0000 9161 2635, GRID grid.423822.d, Centre de Ciència i Tecnologia Forestal de Catalunya (CTFC), ; Crta. Sant Llorenç de Morunys, km 2, Solsona, 25280 Spain
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0437 5432, GRID grid.1022.1, Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, ; Nathan, Qld 4111 Australia
                [3 ]InForest JRU (CTFC-CREAF), Crta. Sant Llorenç de Morunys, km 2, Solsona, 25280 Spain
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2069 7798, GRID grid.5342.0, Wildlife Health Ghent, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, ; Merelbeke, B9820 Belgium
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0722 403X, GRID grid.452388.0, CREAF, ; Cerdanyola del Vallés, 08193 Spain
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2183 4846, GRID grid.4711.3, CSIC, ; Cerdanyola del Vallés, 08193 Spain
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3205-5033
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5815-6089
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0932-826X
                Article
                52625
                10.1038/s41598-019-52625-4
                6834658
                31695108
                ef8746a7-2305-4500-970a-cae37e1b83c5
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 8 May 2019
                : 17 October 2019
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Uncategorized
                biodiversity,conservation biology
                Uncategorized
                biodiversity, conservation biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article