Conservation on the blink: Deficient technical reports threaten conservation in the Natura 2000 network

Lisón, Fulgencio; Altamirano, Adison; Field, Richard; Jones, Gareth

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2017.02.003

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The designation of these areas is based on the presence of certain bird species included in Annex I of the Birds Directive, as well as certain habitats and species (others than birds) included in Annexes I (habitats) and II (species) of the Habitats Directive. However, both criteria for the inclusion of species in these annexes and the designation process for N2000 sites have been criticized, arguing that the establishment of priorities should be more dynamic and based on scientific criteria (Hochkirch et al ., ; Orlikowska et al ., ; Lisón et al ., ). Moreover, annexes are biased towards charismatic species (Cardoso, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network in protecting Iberian endemic fauna

Rosso

Aragón

Acevedo

et al. 2017

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network in protecting Iberian endemic fauna

Rosso

Aragón

Acevedo

et al. 2017

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They enforce member states to protect and report spatial records of many characteristic, endangered, vulnerable, rare and endemic species (but see Lisón et al . 35 ) that are listed in the Annexes of the directives. We refer to these priority species as ‘reported species’.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uniqueness of Protected Areas for Conservation Strategies in the European Union

Hoffmann

Beierkuhnlein

Field

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected areas (PAs) constitute major tools in nature conservation. In the European Union (EU), the Birds and Habitats Directives are the most important policies for conservation strategy, legally preserving Europe’s characteristic, rare, endemic and threatened biota. We used occurrence data for species listed in the directives’ Annexes to assess the uniqueness of major PAs in the EU (National Parks, Biosphere Reserves); this is important for preserving the EU’s focal species. We developed a novel, multifunctional approach to calculate different metrics of conservation value that represent different components of species diversity within the PAs, involving inventory diversity, deviation from the species–area relationship, species rarity and differentiation diversity. Applying it, we found that individual PAs frequently vary considerably in their scores on different components, which are often disconnected from PA size. PAs around the EU periphery, often containing few species, are key to conserving species that are rare in the EU. Because our analysis focuses on EU priority species and includes different components of diversity, it allows more appropriate estimation of conservation value inside PAs in context of the EU than recent, high-profile, global-level research. We offer tools to evaluate, and information to regulate, the representativeness, persistence and efficiency of PAs.

show abstract

“…This biogeographical region covers around 51,000 km 2 in Italy. The last national report [47] assessed 76 habitat types, 47 plant species, and 116 animal species listed in Annex I, II, IV, and V. The most represented habitat-type category was forests (26), followed by grasslands (13), freshwater habitats (12), and rocks and screes (9).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this improvement, several important flaws in the assessments have been identified with respect to information on habitat types and species. These include the difficulty in acquiring accurate information [10,11], deficient classifications [12], and the use of non-objective methods (e.g., expert opinion), which makes comparisons between countries and reporting periods difficult [13,14]. However, the use of additional methods (e.g., models) in addition to field data may help improve the accuracy and usefulness of these assessments [15], and countries are improving their efforts towards the direct monitoring of habitat types and species [16,17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ongoing biodiversity crisis necessitates greater efforts to ensure the adequate conservation of critical habitat types. Even though the identification of protected areas is still required in Europe, conservation efforts are now focusing on management requirements for protected areas and habitat types. Establishing effective management approaches is important for the conservation of the natural and semi-natural habitat types that are identified under the Habitats Directive framework. In this study, we propose a methodology for determining priorities in the conservation management of habitat types based on readily available data. This method relies on four simple criteria to rank habitat types, which includes: conservation condition, biodiversity value, pressure factor, and the cover relevance of habitat types (indicating regional responsibility in terms of area covered). After ranking the habitat types based on the sum of the scores given to all of the criteria, the 25% top-ranking habitat types were prioritized. The pressure factors are analyzed using cluster analysis to better convey information regarding the management needs of groups of habitat types. This prioritization method was tested in habitat types occurring within the Italian Alpine and Continental biogeographical regions. From this analysis, forests, bogs and fens, and dry grasslands were identified as conservation priorities for the Alpine region; meanwhile, a wider variety of habitat types were identified for the Continental region. Important pressure factors were identified (e.g., roads and motorways) for these two biogeographical regions of Italy, which could be used to suggest specific conservation measures. The proposed approach represents a transparent and reliable method for outlining habitat-type priorities based on conservation, biodiversity, pressure, and cover factors, which can be applied to identifying conservation measures that can help achieve biodiversity targets.

show abstract

Conservation on the blink: Deficient technical reports threaten conservation in the Natura 2000 network

Abstract: General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available:

Cited by 24 publications

References 47 publications

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network in protecting Iberian endemic fauna

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network in protecting Iberian endemic fauna

Uniqueness of Protected Areas for Conservation Strategies in the European Union

Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About