Towards a new format for the Prioritised Action Framework (PAF) Summary of outcomes of the last meeting & written comments from Member States Frank Vassen,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The LIFE Integrated Projects
Advertisements

EU Wetland conservation policy. Communication on the Wise Use and Conservation of Wetlands (1995) => first European document dedicated exclusively.
Anne Louise Friedrichsen, LIFE unit LIFE+ Results and lessons learned from the first application round 2007 Anne Louise Friedrichsen, European Commission.
"Financing Natura 2000 & Biodiversity" Status and Perspective (in context of next EU multiannual financial framework) Micheal O'Briain, DG ENV European.
Expert Group on Natura 2000 Management Meeting of 19 May 2011 Fact Sheet on Member State Natura 2000 Management Planning THE N2K GROUP.
Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation ( ) Presentation to Directors Meeting DK 22 May 2012.
Regional Policy EUROPEAN COMMISSION January 2006 EN Investing in Europe's Member States and regions After the European Council's Agreement on the Financial.
Platform Meeting Rudbøl, Denmark Olaf G. Christiani, DFNA.
Module V Creating awareness on validation of the acquired competences
List of priority spatial data sets
The EU context for future funding in Scotland John Bachtler The Future of EU Funding in Scotland European Parliament Seminar Grand Central Hotel, Glasgow,
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Weighting issues in EU-LFS
Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds BRIDGE Project Presentation Contract N° (SSPI) Co-ordinator: BRGM (Fr)
Martin Müller InRoad Coordinator InRoad
List of priority spatial data sets
EU Water Framework Directive
Principles and rationale for SAC/SPA designation and management
Guidance on Natura 2000 and Forests – Scoping Document
Constance von Briskorn BIO by Deloitte 13-14th October 2014
of EU-level green and blue infrastructure
Prioritised Action Frameworks for financing Natura 2000
A new financial instrument
Expert Group on Natura 2000 Management
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
Financing Natura 2000 in the next MFF
New PAF format for Presentation & next steps
3.6 Regional dimension of the poverty and exclusion indicators
1.
on the new biogeographic process
Summary of Scoping Document and feedback
EU Water Framework Directive
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
1.- THE PROJECT. NATURA 2000 NETWORK IN SPAIN
Conservation objectives: The favourable conservation status
Contribution for the updating of the WFD reporting sheets and schemas
Establishing conservation measures for Natura 2000 Sites
Prioritised Action Frameworks for Natura 2000 EU co-financing of conservation measures LIFE+ PAF Workshop Brussels, 3 October 2012.
Natura 2000: points of information
CGBN Co-ordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
Expert Group on the Birds and Habitats Directives
Expert meeting on marine Natura 2000 sites
1st meeting of the working group on wolves 24 September 2009 DG ENV
Opportunities for financing Natura 2000 in the next MFF
Workshop on Biodiversity and Water
FINANCING NATURA 2000 Agenda item 2.1 CGBN Co-ordination Group
Implementation of Article 6(4), first subparagraph of Directive 92/43/ECC during the period
PAF and EU-money for Natura 2000: the German experience
Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation CGBN meeting
The – new – LIFE program (Integrated Projects)
Natura 2000 management group Brussels, 19 May 2011
Progress in the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)
Overview of the implementation of the SEA directive
The New Biogeographic Process General info – December 2011
ESTABLISHING CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR NATURA 2000 SITES
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Green infrastructure developments at EEA 2018
Frequently asked questions Part II: Coordination of monitoring under WFD and BHD Workshop: Biodiversity and Water - Links between EU nature and water.
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Financing Natura 2000 Progress with MFF, Pas/Ops and PAFs
Towards a prioritised action framework for financing Natura 2000
Methodology for assessment of Natura 2000 costs
European waters - assessment of status and pressures 2018
Natura 2000 & Article 17 databases: their potential use in the frame of the Prioritised Action Framework (PAF) Frank Vassen, Unit D3 – nature conservation,
Leverage effect of PAFs : experience from CAP integration
CGBN Co-ordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature
2. WFD implementation: state of play
Presentation transcript:

Towards a new format for the Prioritised Action Framework (PAF) Summary of outcomes of the last meeting & written comments from Member States Frank Vassen, Unit D3 – nature conservation, DG ENV, European Commission Brussels, 4 December 2017

written feedback on the PAF format received from 15 Member States: AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FR, HU, IT, LT, PL, SE, SK

General objective of the PAF Is the current definition of the purpose of the PAF sufficiently clear? Should the PAF primarily be a supporting document for the programming of EU funds, providing reliable estimates of EU funding needs, or should it have a wider purpose (e.g. for the acquisition other national or international financing)? To what extent should the PAF be aligned with the objectives of Article 8 Habitats Directive?

Substantive scope of the PAF Should the PAF only cover Natura 2000-related priorities, measures and costs sensu stricto, or also other conservation issues (f. ex. measures outside of the network, EU species protection, other EU biodiversity strategy issues, national priorities, national protected areas, etc.) ? Should the PAF only cover a limited set of priorities, or should it cover everything that is required to achieve the objectives of Natura 2000 / the EU nature directives ? Should the temporal scope of the PAF only cover the next MFF period ? Should the PAF include actions and costs that are not strictly needed to achieve the core objectives of the nature directives (such as visitor centres, etc.) ?

Approaches to prioritization What kind of general criteria should be used for establishing priorities? How should Member States communicate/justify their priorities in the PAF? Should information on status and trends from individual species and habitats from Article 17 / Article 12 reporting be used to establish conservation priorities?

Priorities, measures and costs: level of detail Should priorities, measures and costs be provided per individual habitat types and species, or rather be clustered by habitat and species groups with similar requirements? Would rough cost estimates be sufficient? Why did the Commission not consider an approach based on aggregating information for individual sites/ site management plans (as recommended in the Special Court of Auditors report) ? To what extent could the required level of detail be aligned with the structure of the MFF post 2020, given current uncertainties?

Improving the communication value of PAFs The importance of the PAF as a communication/awareness raising tool should be reflected by the format All PAFs should start with a standard explanatory introduction, framing its context, objectives, status and future uses any information/text box that is not strictly necessary should be removed (“lean” PAF) Should the PAF include an assessment of the expenditures during the current MFF period? Taking into account uncertainties about the future MFF, should there be any reference in the PAF to current and future programmes?

Usefulness of the current list of 25 measures Is the current list of 25 types of measures fit for purpose (in terms of consistency with types of measures and budget allocations in EU programmes)? Several Member States suggested simplified lists of measures. Would these also be fit for purpose?