Coordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature Cost Estimate & Benefits of Natura 2000 - A methodological Toolkit for assessing socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000 M. Kettunen www.ieep.eu Coordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature 12 Feb 09 Brussels, BE

The essence & aims of the Toolkit Scope A standard methodology / approach to assess Natura 2000 related socio-economic benefits at site level Target audience Firstly, practitioners involved in the management of Natura 2000 sites (e.g. site managers) Other stakeholders interested in the value of biodiversity & ecosystem services Aims Increase awareness on socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000 Help to identify and valuate these benefits in practise. Improve the communication of these benefits to different stakeholders and the general public. Overall goal: better understanding & increased communication of the Natura 2000 related socio-economic benefits helps to create a wider support to the network, including ensuring resources for its management.

Toolkit’s guiding principles Socio-economic benefits identified via ecosystem services provided / supported by sites Value of biodiversity & Natura 2000 is manifold & cannot always be captured in Euros (qualitative, quantitative and monetary values) Identified benefits should be used sustainably respecting sites’ conservation goals and management plans Ecosystem services are often linked. These linkages should be understood in order to jointly manage and maintain them; and not to overestimating the total value of a site.

Toolkit’s structure & application Part 1: Contextual guidance Part 2: Application of the Toolkit Step 1: Rapid overall assessment of site’s possible benefits Focus on all benefits To obtain an initial overall picture of site’s benefits To identify the relevant services and related benefits, e.g. prioritise them for more detailed analysis (Step 2) 1 Step 2: Estimating socio-economic value of different Natura 2000 related benefits Focus on individual ecosystem services & their benefits Introducing methods for qualitative, quantitative and monetary value estimates 2 Part 3: Framework & guidance to form an overall picture of the total value of the site E.g. how to interpret, present & communicate the different values

Step 1: Rapid Assessment Framework - an example Ecosystem service Does the Natura site provide this service? Who benefits from this service? Local / regional / national / global stakeholders Your own estimate (NOTE: no need to distinguish between Options 1-3) Significance of this service / service potential? Your own rapid estimate 0– 5 Types of evaluation possible Easy to obtain Possible, but laborious to obtain Regulating services Climate / climate change regulation Carbon sequestration, maintaining and controlling temperature and precipitation Option 1. The site has a high carbon sequestration capacity (e.g. forest area) and/or important role in regulating microclimate. There is also some relevant data available (amount of wood biomass, carbon capture capacity, estimates for sequestered carbon etc.) YES This service is of socio-economic relevance at the site Regional Global (for example) 4 (for example) (Monetary) Quantitative Qualitative Monetary Option 2. The site has a high carbon sequestration capacity (e.g. forest area) and/or important role in regulating microclimate but there is a lack of existing relevant data Option 3. Site’s current climate regulation services could be enhanced via appropriate management and obtaining site’s favourable conservation status This service could be of socio-economic relevance in the future (potential value) Step 1: Rapid Assessment Framework - an example

Step 1: Rapid Assessment: example outcome Aims of the Rapid Assessment Framework: Get the first overall picture of the ”benefit potential” As a visual basis for initial dicussions with colleagues etc. Identify the most relevant services for further detailed analysis (qualitative / quantitative / monetary)

Step 2: In-depth Analysis Service-specific guidance provided by the Toolkit: Section 5.1. Provisioning services: Biodiversity resources Section 5.2. Provisioning services: Water Section 5.3. Cultural & social services: Ecotourism and recreation Section 5.4. Cultural & social services: Cultural values and inspirational services Section 5.5. Cultural & social services: Landscape and amenity values Section 5.6. Regulating services: Climate regulation Section 5.7. Regulating services: Water regulation Section 5.8. Regulating services: Water purification & waste management Section 5.9. Regulating services: Air quality regulation Section 5.10. Regulating services: Erosion regulation Section 5.11. Regulating services: Avalanche regulation Section 5.12. Regulating services: Storm damage control Section 5.13. Regulating services: Fire regulation Section 5.14. Regulating services: Biological control Section 5.15. Regulating services: Pollination & seed dispersal Section 5.16. Regulating services: Human health Section 5.17. Regulating services: Maintaining genetic & species diversity Section 5.18. Supporting services Section 5.19. Wider socio-economic benefits Following guidance provided for each service category: What is this service? Who maintains the service and who benefits from it? Which Natura 2000 sites this service might be of potential relevance? How to estimate the value of this service? Valuation methods for qualitative, quantitative and monetary estimates. Focus specifically on estimates considered feasible to be obtained by practitioners How can the estimated value be turned into real money for the site?

Step 3. Final Synthesis & Key Messages Outputs 1. A general case study template for site level 2. A synthesis table on the benefits 3. Key questions to interpret & discuss the results, e.g. What were the important benefits & could they be valuated? Are some of the identified benefits in danger? Is the importance of any ecosystem service likely to increase in the future? Can identified benefits be sustainably managed and promoted? What are the trade-offs between different benefits? What are the possible implications in the wider context of the Natura 2000 Network? In the light of the results, what could / should the future actions be?

Step 3. Final Synthesis & Key Messages - an example

State of play – next steps Toolkit being applied to / tested with 5 case studies (by WWF and RSPB partners) Case study sites Bialowieza forest (Poland) Guadiana Natural Park (Portugal) Oas-Gutai Plateau (Romania) Pico da Vara / Ribeira do Guilherme protected area (Azores) Abernethy forest (Scotland, the UK) Revising the Toolkit based on comments / lessons learned from case studies June 09 – final Toolkit & the end of the project

Thank you. Thank you! Marianne Kettunen mkettunen@ieep.eu IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment in Europe.