Implementing EU biodiversity policy: UK experiences

Ledoux, Laure; Crooks, Stephen; Jordan, Andrew; Turner, R. Kerry

doi:10.1016/s0264-8377(00)00031-4

Cited by 71 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar problems, e.g. administrative, scientific (lack of data and tools) and social, were also encountered in other countries (in UK: Ledoux et al 2000;in Greece: Apostolopoulou and Pantis 2009;in Finland: Björkell 2008, Hiedanpää 2002in Germany: Stoll-Kleeman 2001a, b;in Ireland: Bryan 2012) and at the European scale (Keulartz 2009;Julien et al 2000;Jackson 2011). Many environmental diagnoses were questioned, notably for potentially unreliable methods due to insufficient financial and human resources and a lack of data control, which slowed the implementation of new Natura 2000 sites at local level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species

Trochet¹,

Schmeller²

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world's biodiversity is currently in rapid decline -Europe being no exception -with as principal cause a human-mediated global change. The Natura 2000 network is an important conservation tool for European biodiversity; it is a network of natural and semi-natural sites within Europe with high heritage values due to the exceptional flora and fauna they contain. Here, we evaluated the coverage of 300 threatened species by the Natura 2000 network, and determined potential factors influencing the designation of sites and the structure of the network within a country (social, ecological and demographic national factors). Our analysis was based on a coverage ratio between the Natura 2000 sites and distribution maps of threatened European species. We showed that the distributions of a large proportion of threatened species of mammals, birds and reptiles considered in our study were highly covered (above 90%) by the current Natura 2000 network, demonstrating that the Natura 2000 network also covers species not listed in the annexes of the Nature Directives. However, our results confirm that a large proportion of threatened species (some of them listed on the European annexes), especially fishes, are currently poorly covered by the Natura 2000 network. The coverage of species likely seemed to be highly related to national demographic factors, i.e. the proportion of the national urban population. Our analysis also suggested that the designation of sites depends too strongly on governmental politics, economic and cultural criteria, and interactions between society and the environment. A more effective process might be necessary to ensure the Natura 2000 network reaches its potential as the most important and comprehensive network of protected areas intended to halt the loss of biodiversity in Europe in the near future.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species

Trochet¹,

Schmeller²

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A rigid and static interpretation of the Birds and Habitats Directives for example confl icts with the management of highly dynamic ecosystems (cf. Ledoux et al, 2000;Lee, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation and integration of EU environmental directives. Experiences from The Netherlands

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European integration has consequences for environmental planning in the European Union. Recent evaluations of the European Commission show that implementation of environmental directives proves to be a challenging task for the responsible authorities. This paper discusses the relation between the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the Birds and Habitats Directives in The Netherlands. Studies from this member state show that legal and procedural aspects of planning and decision making gain the most attention and that environmental goals are fading into the background. We study the integration of the two directives from a policy and practice perspective and discuss the diffi culties that arise in the implementation process.

show abstract

“…Consequently, Tomaselli et al (2013) proposed a framework to translate LCCS classes into habitat categories, with these described according to Annex I to the Habitats Directive (92/43 EEC). The Habitats Directive is the main European Union (EU) legal instrument concerning biodiversity and conservation of natural habitats; its Annex I provides a list of natural habitats of Community interest within the EU and it is of central importance for international reporting and Natura 2000 site management (Ladoux et al 2000;Mehtälä and Vuorisalo 2007). The list does not include anthropogenic and artificial habitats and, although organized into nine groups, it appears that there is no way to identify natural habitats in the field other than by gaining familiarity with the list by local experts who are generally used to interpret the descriptions when answering to national priorities (Bunce et al 2012b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expert knowledge for translating land cover/use maps to General Habitat Categories (GHC)

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring biodiversity at the level of habitats and landscape is becoming widespread in Europe and elsewhere as countries establish international and national habitat conservation policies and monitoring systems. Earth Observation (EO) data offers a potential solution to long-term biodiversity monitoring through direct mapping of habitats or by integrating Land Cover/Use (LC/LU) maps with contextual spatial information and in situ data. Therefore, it appears necessary to develop an automatic/semi-automatic translation framework of LC/ LU classes to habitat classes, but also challenging due to discrepancies in domain definitions. In the context of the FP7 BIO_SOS (www.biosos.eu) project, the authors demonstrated the feasibility of the Food and Agricultural Organization Land Cover Classification System (LCCS) taxonomy to habitat class translation. They also developed a framework to automatically translate LCCS classes into the recently proposed General Habitat Categories classification system, able to provide an exhaustive typology of habitat types, ranging from natural ecosystems to urban areas around the globe. However discrepancies in terminology, plant height criteria and basic principles between the two mapping domains inducing a number of one-to-many and many-to-many relations were identified, revealing the need of additional ecological expert knowledge to resolve the ambiguities. This paper illustrates how class phenology, class topological arrangement in the landscape, class spectral signature from multi-temporal Very High spatial Resolution (VHR) satellite imagery and plant height

show abstract

Implementing EU biodiversity policy: UK experiences

Cited by 71 publications

References 13 publications

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species

Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species

Implementation and integration of EU environmental directives. Experiences from The Netherlands

Expert knowledge for translating land cover/use maps to General Habitat Categories (GHC)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About