Costs of restoration measures in the EU based on an assessment of LIFE projects

Restoring ecosystems to reverse biodiversity loss and to enhance ecosystem services is an important target of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. At global and European level the target is to restore 15% of degraded ecosystems. Identifying sites that should be considered for restoration in order to achieve the target requires spatial information on where degraded ecosystem are, on the kind of mitigation measures that are needed to restore ecosystems to a good condition, and on the costs and benefits of restoration in order to prioritise investments. At all these levels, detailed spatial information is lacking. This report contributes to the ecosystem restoration knowledge base by providing cost estimates of specific restoration measures.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

Enhancing Resilience Of Urban Ecosystems through Green Infrastructure (EnRoute): Inception report

This inception report describes the overall goals of EnRoute and the activities that are foreseen in the Project. It also provides a detailed description of the way the three tasks will be executed, and how they will interact with each other (or: how they are linked to each other). The report also contains a rolling plan which will be regularly updated.JRC.D.3-Land Resource

An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020

Maes, Joachim... et al.-- 10 pages, 2 figures, 3 tables, supplementary material https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.023In the EU, the mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services, abbreviated to MAES, is seen as a key action for the advancement of biodiversity objectives, and also to inform the development and implementation of related policies on water, climate, agriculture, forest, marine and regional planning. In this study, we present the development of an analytical framework which ensures that consistent approaches are used throughout the EU. It is framed by a broad set of key policy questions and structured around a conceptual framework that links human societies and their well-being with the environment. Next, this framework is tested through four thematic pilot studies, including stakeholders and experts working at different scales and governance levels, which contributed indicators to assess the state of ecosystem services. Indicators were scored according to different criteria and assorted per ecosystem type and ecosystem services using the common international classification of ecosystem services (CICES) as typology. We concluded that there is potential to develop a first EU wide ecosystem assessment on the basis of existing data if they are combined in a creative way. However, substantial data gaps remain to be filled before a fully integrated and complete ecosystem assessment can be carried outBalint Czúcz was supported by the Bolyai Grant of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences under grant number BO/00138/12/8Peer Reviewe

The predation impact of juvenile herring Clupea harengus and sprat Sprattus sprattus on estuarine zooplankton

The consumption of estuarine copepods by juvenile herring and sprat during estuarine residency was estimated using fish biomass data and daily rations calculated from two models of feeding in fish: a bioenergetic model and a gastric evacuation model. The bioenergetic model predicted daily rations that were, on average, three times higher than those estimated by a model based on field records of stomach contents. The biomass of herring and sprat in the estuary was negatively correlated with the daily ration suggesting that the clupeid fish populations were resource-limited. Copepod production decreased towards the winter and peaked in spring and summer. The relative importance of predation changed seasonally in function of the migration pattern of herring and sprat. In the spring and the summer, in situ production of␣copepod biomass was higher than the in situ consumption by fish. During the fall and the winter, consumption exceeded production. This suggests that top–down control exerted by marine pelagic fish may be an important force structuring estuarine copepod populations

A model for the assessment of habitat conservation status in the EU

Under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, Member States of the EU must submit information on how the Habitats Directive is being implemented every six years. For the reporting period 2001 to 2006, 25 Member States provided, for the first time, detailed assessments on the conservation status of each of the habitat types and species listed in the directive and found on their territory or different bio-geographical regions therein. This report presents a model based approach to assess how conservation status may change in the future. This approach is based on the available assessments and simulates the probability that a habitat assessment results in a favourable conservation status as a function of drivers of change.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

A European assessment of the provision of ecosystem services - Towards an atlas of ecosystem services

Until recently, biodiversity policies were essentially driven by conservation of rare and endangered habitats and species. Although substantial efforts have been undertaken to protect nature, the 2010 target of stopping the loss of biodiversity has not been met. New policies at global and European level have therefore complemented conservation based biodiversity targets using the argument of ecosystem services. Ecosystem services are the benefits people receive from nature. So far, data for mapping such services are strongly biased towards provisioning services such as food and timber production while spatial information of so called regulating and cultural ecosystem services is, largely lacking. This report summarizes the key data needed for mapping ecosystem services at a European scale and presented a first set of maps showing the capacity of ecosystems to provide services.JRC.DDG.H.5-Rural, water and ecosystem resource

Enhancing Resilience Of Urban Ecosystems through Green Infrastructure (EnRoute): Progress report

EnRoute stands for Enhancing Resilience of urban ecosystems through green infrastructure. EnRoute is a project of the European Commission in the framework of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Green Infrastructure Strategy. EnRoute provides scientific knowledge of how urban ecosystems can support urban planning at different stages of policy and for various spatial scales and how to help policy-making for sustainable cities. It aims to promote the application of urban green infrastructure at local level and delivers guidance on the creation, management and governance of urban green infrastructure. Importantly, it illustrates how collaboration between and across different policy levels can lead to concrete green infrastructure policy setting. This report describes the progress made by EnRoute since the start of the project (01/12/2016). EnRoute is testing the MAES indicator framework on mapping and assessment of urban ecosystems in 20 cities across Europe. The report collects the relevant policy questions for these cities with respect to urban green infrastructure and identifies which indicators of the MAES analytical framework can be used to support local policy. The report includes the datasets and models that will be used for an EU wide assessment of urban ecosystems and their services. The report contains a first proposal for an online survey on the functionality of a science policy interface on urban green infrastructure at different governance levels. The report describes the contributions of EnRoute to other initiatives: update of the MAES indicator framework for ecosystem condition, the task force on an impact evaluation framework for nature based solutions under Horizon 2020, and the EU urban agenda.JRC.D.3-Land Resource

A Pan-European Delimitation of Coastal Waters: Compliance with EU Environmental Legislation

The definition of coastal waters in relation to EU environmental legislation was clearly stated in the Water Framework Directive. In compliance with this Directive, most of the EU Member States delineated their coastal waters¿ boundaries. However, these delineations are not as complete and homogeneous as could be expected. A clear identification of European coastal waters boundaries is crucial for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which depend on an accurate ecological/environmental assessment of those waters. Hence, there is a need for a comprehensive and unambiguous delimitation of European coastal waters. This report aims at bridging this gap providing a pan-European mapping of coastal waters, which cover 553,817 km2 in 30 seaside countries, 340,524 km2 of which pertain to the 22 EU Member States connected to the sea. For this purpose, a comprehensive geographical analysis of the national baselines and transitional waters distribution was performed. A pan-European baseline of 63,340 km was delineated as a basis for the European coastal waters delimitation. The European coastal waters identified in this work show significant differences with the available national declarations (almost 12% of the compared area), the latter defining an additional area of 29,337 km2 with respect to the former. The largest deviations seem to be due to misinterpretations of the definition of coastal waters in the Water Framework Directive, although a number of one-sided national modifications to that definition are also observed. This work provides the geographical basis for a full consultation process and discussion about this subject. Our recommendations include setting a clear geographical limit between the Water Framework Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive jurisdiction, revise the possible exemptions in the definition of coastal waters, and discuss their consequences in the assessment of ecological/environmental status.JRC.DDG.H.5-Rural, water and ecosystem resource

Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects

Mapping of ecosystem services' (ESS) values means valuing ESS in monetary terms across a relatively large geographical area and assessing how values vary across space. Thereby, mapping of ESS values reveals additional information as compared to traditional site-specific ESS valuation, which is beneficial for designing land use policies for maintaining ESS supply. Since the well-known article by Costanza et al. (1997), who mapped global ESS values, the number of publications mapping ESS values has grown exponentially, with almost 60% being published after 2007. Within this paper, we analyse and review articles that map ESS values. Our findings show that methodologies, in particular how spatial variations of ESS values are estimated, their spatial scope, rational and ESS focus differ widely. Still, most case studies rely on relatively simplistic approaches using land use/cover data as a proxy for ESS supply and its values. However, a tendency exists towards more sophisticated methodologies using the ESS models and value functions, which integrate a variety of spatial variables and which are validated against primary data. Based on our findings, we identify current practices and developments in the mapping of EES values and provide guidelines and recommendations for future applications and research

How ecosystem services are changing: an accounting application at the EU level

Ecosystem services accounts are a useful tool that provides relevant information on the role of ecosystems in delivering services, and the society benefiting from them. This paper presents the accounting workflow for ecosystem services at the European Union level adopted by the Knowledge Innovation Project on an Integrated system for Natural Capital and ecosystem services Accounting (KIP INCA) - a European Commission initiative. The workflow includes: 1) biophysical assessment of ecosystem services; 2) monetary valuation; and 3) compilation of accounting tables. Supply and use tables are presented for six ecosystem services assessed so far. The supply table shows woodland and forest, followed by wetlands, as the ecosystem types with the highest monetary value per unit area. Analyses of changes between 2000 and 2012 show an overall increase of the monetary value of ecosystem services, mainly due to an increase in demand for them. We also discuss advantages and disadvantages of adopting a fast-track approach, based on official statistics, in comparison to an accounting strategy based on spatial models. We propose a novel workflow for ecosystem services accounts, focused on assessment of the actual flow of ecosystem services, making a significant contribution to further development of the technical recommendations for ecosystem service