Measuring Farmland Biodiversity

Despite close interaction between agriculture and biodiversity—farms cover one-third of the world’s land surface—little is empirically known about the ecological effects of different farming practices. About one-third of the world’s land surface is used for farming, a fact that bears important implications for biodiversity. In Europe, for instance, an estimated 50 percent of all wild species are reliant on agricultural habitats, while agricultural productivity often depends on the presence or absence of particular species. Despite this close coupling, surprisingly little is known about the status and evolution of farmland biodiversity. A team of European and African researchers, hoping to fill this gap in information, recently invented and piloted a new toolbox called the BioBio indicator set, which measures 23 different instances of biodiversity across a variety of farm types and scales in Europe. Applications were also tested in Tunisia, Ukraine, and Uganda, where they proved a feasible starting point for adaptation to the agricultural context of different countrie

Editorial : Bio-energy landscapes

--

WS2 evaluation of synthesis and arguments framework with stakeholder recommendations

Stakeholder consultation and involvement remain central to BESAFE’s success. The BESAFE project organised its second stakeholder workshop in Brussels on 13 and 14 May 2014. Building upon the feedback obtained from stakeholders at the first workshop (reported in D2.2), the central aim of this second workshop was to consult with stakeholders to obtain their further opinions and suggestions about how the synthesis of results and the development of the arguments framework can be best tailored for practical application and ease of access by a wide variety of future users. Accordingly, BESAFE partners gave presentations on the initial results from the case studies and the effectiveness of arguments (WP2), an overview of arguments surrounding the European Biodiversity Strategy at EU and Member State levels (WP3), links between biodiversity and ecosystem services (WP4) and design and content of the synthesis tool kit and web tool (WP5). Stakeholders were asked to comment and make suggestions during break-out group, plenary and round table discussions. Resulting important recommendations, that also take account of additional comments from the project Advisory Board, include: • Design of the toolkit and the briefs that it comprises should put emphasis on the arguments involved, on how they are used, and on their effectiveness in different situations, in keeping with the overall focus of BESAFE. • The information should be presented in a style and format that will maximise knowledge transfer to a variety of audiences. • The web tool should be designed to be user-friendly for a range of stakeholder types to enable them to access appropriate information efficiently. • A clear strategy should be developed for the afterlife of the project results – a “bequeathing strategy” to ensure longevity of the toolkit and web tool beyond the end of the project. • There was some reiteration of recommendations made at the first workshop (see BESAFE Deliverable 2.2), particularly that language and contextual framing should be tailored to the different user groups, and that the overall framework of project outputs should focus on the use of arguments and combinations of arguments in practical situations. The stakeholders welcomed and accepted the invitation to assist with the further development of the toolkit and web tool through opportunities for consultation and contribution during the final phase of the project (including, but not limited to, the final stakeholder workshop)

Rule based system for in situ identification of annex I habitats

In the EBONE project the recognition of Annex I habitats in the field has been considered as an important issue. A hierarchical structure is created in this report within which the Annex I habitats can be identified. The current concept of an expert system emerged during an ECOLAND forum meeting in Almeria south-eastern Spain and further developed in close consultation with the European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity (ETC-BD). The concept uses the General Habitat Categories as described in the EBONE Field Handbook. The rule based system for Annex I habitats will promote consistent identification between Member States. A direct key is not possible because of the way the habitats have been produced over the years as well as the need for application of expert judgement. The system has been tested in the field in Spain, Portugal and Italy

Field identification of habitats directive Annex I habitats as a major European biodiversity indicator

Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive lists the habitats which must be protected by the designation and management of protected areas in the European Union. These habitats are therefore a key indicator of biodiversity and although organised into nine groups, there is no way to identify them other than by gaining familiarity with the list. It is therefore necessary for observers who do not have sufficient experience to have a system to guide them into an appropriate class when in the field. A key has therefore been produced based on defined habitat categories that can be recorded consistently in the field in order to restrict the range of options for any given habitat patch. Expert judgement may still be needed to finalise the allocation to a specific class. A direct key is not possible because the list of Annex I habitats has been produced by meetings of national experts and final allocation often requires scientific judgement. A rule based system for Annex I habitats has therefore been designed to aid identification of the classes and to promote consistent interpretation between Member States. It is intended that in due course that the descriptions will be further developed from other data sources and by consultation with local experts. The first stage is to record a defined list of habitat categories in the field according to a series of rules. In the second stage a structure is provided to identify Annex I habitats that are landscape units or habitat complexes. In the third stage the recorded habitat categories are used to provide a structure to identify other classes using moisture and acidity levels as the primary filter. All Annex I habitats are characterised by summary data, including indicator species and geographical distribution. The system has been tested in the field throughout Europe and is available for field computers under Windows Mobile in order to enable ready access and encourage consistency