Study on identifying the drivers of successful implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives

Study objectives provide a compilation of all Genuine Improvements that MS have reported with regard to positive trends of individual habitat types or species, and identify the main success factors explaining these improvements (the "drivers of success"). Genuine Improvements are any improvements that are real rather than due to better data or improved knowledge, irrespective of the cause of the improvement. in relation to the key drivers of success, providing a series of ‘lessons learnt’ and recommendations for the Commission and for Member State authorities, on how to enhance and up-scale implementation, as well as to improve the accompanying reporting and monitoring processes. The study was undertaken to help scale up and more widely implement successful conservation measures, thereby supporting follow up to the Nature Directives Fitness Check, including the Action Plan on Nature, People and the Economy

Tasks The establishment of a database list of Genuine Improvements and associated main drivers explaining the successes: Establishment of a list of identified Genuine Improvements (status improvements or positive trends) in the conservation status of species and habitat types. Identification of the main drivers explaining these Genuine Improvements. An in depth assessment of the drivers of success in a representative sub-set of examples. Drawing strategic lessons and technical recommendations.

Information sources used in the study Birds Directive Article 12 and Habitats Directive Article 17 report data. Additional information provided by 13 MS on specific “Measure Driven“ Improvements through a questionnaire (e.g. role of N2k, funding sources, LIFE). Consultations with LIFE External Monitoring team on case studies. Case study information, including consultations with national practitioners and experts. Review of key literature on important topics (e.g. LIFE reports on factors affecting long-term success) to fill evidence gaps from the MDI and case study data.

Identification of Genuine Improvements Creation of a Genuine Improvements Database (GID). Habitats Directive Annex I habitats and Annex II, IV and V species Article 17 data: showing improvements in status and/or positive trends in one or more assessment parameters indicated by MS as Genuine. Birds Directive Annex I or II species that are also SPA trigger species Article 12 data: increasing EU populations over the short-term (2001-2012), or stable and fluctuating short-term EU populations, in the face of long-term declining trends. Only if good short-term monitoring data and good or moderate long term monitoring data. In addition, reliability of trends commented on by national BirdLife International experts. Sub-reporting level Genuine Improvements identified by examination of the LIFE database and consultations with experts. MS asked to validate identified Genuine Improvements – 18 responded.

Identified Genuine Improvements Number identified (including non-validated cases) 91 for Annex 1 habitats 195 cases for HD species 638 cases for BD birds Cases of Genuine Improvements in habitats and HD species was significantly limited by data gaps, with none being identified for Bulgaria, Malta, and Romania, less than ten being identified for nine other MS; which had a significant constraint on the rest of the study.

Measure Driven Improvements - MDI Subsequent analysis focussed on MDI Defined as Genuine Improvement that are considered to have been the result of intentional environmental measures, whether or not they were targeted at the habitat or species in question, or other habitats and species, or were more general environmental measures. Initially identified using the MS Article 12 and 17 data: specifically species and habitats that have shown Genuine Improvements and have one or more listed conservation measures that were evaluated by the MS as ‘Maintain’ or ‘Enhance’. MS authorities were asked to validate these MDI, and provide further information on the type of measures taken – 13 MS provided information.

Identified Measure Driven Improvements - MDI Identified MDI (including non-verified MDI): 80 MDI for Annex I habitats 130 for HD species 456 for BD birds Representation very uneven across biogeographical regions, MS, broad habitats and species groups: A high proportion of MDI arise from the continental and Atlantic biogeographical regions. The largest group of MDI cases relate to coastal habitats, with most others from freshwater, forests, grasslands, bogs etc, dunes. No MDI for any marine habitats.

Case studies Aim was to ensure that they are as representative as possible of the range of MS, biogeographic regions, habitat and species groups that had shown MDI, and to provide insights of wide relevance. Cases identified from information in the GID, MS recommendations and consultations with the Commission and LIFE monitoring team. 53 cases finally selected (after some dropped due to insufficient available information). Many cases relate to Atlantic Biogeographical region (14) and there is a relatively high proportion covering coastal habitats (4), mammals (9) or birds (17). No, or very few, cases for Macaronesian, Steppic, Marine Baltic and Marine Mediterranean biogeographical regions, inland and Mediterranean sand dunes, Mediterranean scrubland habitats, rocky habitats and marine species (other than birds). Although every effort was made to provide a coherent and representative sample of case studies as possible, their findings should also be interpreted with their limited representivity in mind. It is also important to note that the case studies do not necessarily represent the best examples of conservation measures for the habitats and species that were covered, or of the approaches and methods that they illustrate, and they may not have resulted in the most significant improvements. Nevertheless they provide a valuable body of information that provides numerous insights on many of the drivers of the MDI.

Key conclusions on the drivers of success -1 The role of political support, governance, institutions and their staff Wide evidence that strong and coherent governance, with effective supporting institutions, is a pre-requisites for success. Highly motivated individuals, in authorities, NGOs and stakeholders often a crucial catalyst. The role of land owners and other stakeholders Adequate and effective stakeholder engagement essential in most situations. The role of the Natura 2000 network and other protected areas Not possible to quantify the added impact but obviously a key driver, through protection and triggering conservation measures (MPS, LIFE, agri-environment etc). The role of broad conservation measures Few MDI have involved wide-scale actions, but water quality improvements key for some. Nitrogen deposition above critical levels likely to be a major constraint on achieving many MDI.

Key conclusions on the drivers of success - 2 Approaches to tackling pressures in agricultural and wetland ecosystems Due to large areas and the high per unit costs of conservation, most MDI on agricultural land have been for scarce habitats and species with a high proportion in N2k – enabling targeted interventions (e.g. intensive engagement with farmers, tailored and supported management). The situation for wetlands is more supportive for MDI, but further implementation of the WFD is necessary as poor water quality remains a barrier to success for some habitats and species. Funding and resources requirements LIFE program clearly the most important fund for MDI – at least in short term. Agri-environment schemes sometimes important, but less than might be expected. Little evidence of significant funding from private sources or innovative instruments.

Key conclusions on the drivers of success - 3 The role of research and monitoring Effective and efficient conservation measures are dependent on reliable, up-to-date knowledge of the requirements of the targeted habitats and species, and the pressures affecting them. Adequate, appropriately designed and targeted monitoring can play a key role through facilitating adaptive management. Factors that lead to the long-term sustainability of conservation outcomes The sustainability of conservation measures needs to be carefully planned for, especially in relation to long-term financing, securing commitments (e.g. through contracts), maintenance of partnerships, capacity and monitoring.

Recommendations – Governance and stakeholders Strengthen governance at national and regional level to provide the foundations on which targeted actions to improve the status of habitats and species is dependent. Improve inter-regional cooperation where necessary to ensure that joint and co-ordinated actions are taken to achieve improvements across multiple regions. Deepen stakeholder involvement where necessary e.g. through participatory processes rather than a limited consultation.

Recommendations – Implementing legislation Ensure the N2k and wider protected area network is sufficient and coherent, to increase protection and trigger conservation measures and access to targeted funding. Ensure that all public bodies comply fully with the requirements of the Nature Directives. Fully implement supporting legislation, in particular the WFD and NECD. Enforce Nature Directives protection measures on agricultural land, and elsewhere where necessary, in particular within the N2k network. Strengthen biodiversity measures in the CAP and improve the implementation of other environmental regulations on agricultural land.

Recommendations – Funding Provide an adequate and accessible EU budget allocation for the implementation of the Nature Directives. Increase the capacity of environmental authorities and NGO organisations involved in nature conservation to access funds. Bolster the LIFE programme and increase its funding for nature projects, whilst also increasing complementary and longer-term funding sources. Increase targeted EAFRD funding for implementation of the Nature Directives, especially through tailored agri-environment climate schemes within N2k sites. Ensure CAP payment eligibility rules do not encourage damage to habitats and species covered by the Directives, or preclude farmers from obtaining CAP funds for their required conservation measures.

Recommendations – Planning, research and monitoring Develop and use habitat and species action plans to identify and coordinate coherent measures. Ensure that knowledge of the impacts of planned conservation actions is adequate before implementing them at a large-scale. Strategically plan restoration based on research into the specific requirements of the habitats and species concerned and the spatial distribution of suitable areas. Carry out adequate monitoring of conservation interactions and their impacts, adjust actions if necessary, learn lessons and disseminate them.

Recommendations – sustaining improvements Design and plan for the long term. Provide long term finance and incentives. Maintain diverse partnerships and engagement. Demonstrate the socio-economic benefits of species and habitats as this can motivate communities and businesses to value them. Ensure that appropriate land uses and management are maintained, e.g. through long term management agreements (underpinned by legal and contractual arrangements), or land purchase where this is cost-effective or otherwise necessary.