1. Towards a sustainable management of pond diversity at the landscape level (2006-2010) PONDSCAPE

2. F.U. Committee 15 9 2008, RBINSc   Introduction to PONDSCAPE (Koen)   Activities and developments since last meeting (Tom)   Social and historic context of ponds (Kevin)   Mid Term Evaluation (Koen)   Prospects (Koen)   Reception (ALL)

3. PONDSCAPE Network: C: Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels: K.Martens, B. Goddeeris, L. Colson, J. Vandekerckhove P2:Catholique University of Leuven: L. De Meester, S. De Clerck, T De Bie P3:University of Ghent: W. Vyverman, K. Van Der Gucht, P4: University of Namur: Ecotox: P. Kestemont, R. Mandiki Socio-econ: A. Castiaux, N. Feremans P5: University of Luxembourg: H-M Cauchie

4. PONDSCAPE Network: associated partners C: RBINSc INBO: D Bauwens, L Denys P2: KULeuven Natuurpunt: M Herremans P3: Ugent Botanical Garden: L Van Hecke P4: U Namur U Liége: B Losson P5: U Lux:

5. PONDSCAPE Strategic objectives: => recommendations for scientifically underpinned management of small water bodies, while reconciling: –Conserve and enhance biodiversity at various scales (local, regional, landscape) –sustain economic activities and ensure economic growth

6. PONDSCAPE Operational objectives:  To study the organization of pond biodiversity, –including ecosystem functioning, –at multiple spatial scales –relate it with important driving variables (pond age)  To quantify effects of management strategies on local and regional pond biota biodiversity

7. PONDSCAPE Operational objectives:  To broaden our knowledge on the prevalence of pollutants and the effects they have on pond biota  To obtain insights into the way stakeholders value risks and benefits of ponds, –how the creation and maintenance of ponds can be promoted in a sustainable way.

8. PONDSCAPE Work packages  WP1: Biodiversity at multiple spatial scales  WP2: Biodiversity and pond age  WP3: Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning  WP4: Assessment of management techniques  WP5: Pollutants and biodiversity  WP6: Social and economic relevance to stakeholders  WP7: Valuation of results, policy, rcommendations

9. Follow Up Committee: what is expected of you?

10. Follow-up committee: what for? – –Management tool enabling to meet the SSD programme objectives, in particular:   To provide scientific support for a sustainable development policy   To promote communication between – –researchers, decision-makers and the society

11. Follow-up committee : status/role   Foreseen in the contract   Members act on a voluntary basis: – –commitment to play an active role in the follow- up of the research – –requested to fill out a Declaration of intent   Advisory role: advice, feedback, orientations, comments on project reports… (within the framework of the contract)

12. Follow-up committee : profile   Heterogeneous set of members acting on basis of possible input, expectations, interests… regarding the research project – – “Interest”: in intermediary and final outcomes of the project – – “Input”: bring new insight into the scientific and policy context, the research question, the assumptions, …

13. Follow Up Committee: members?   Public administrations (different sectors and levels of authorities) – –Scientific community – –NGOs – –Private sector – –Media   The composition of the committee may evolve during the course of the project

14. Follow-up committee meeting: Operational aspects   Convened by the coordinator and science officer twice a year and ad-hoc – –Relevant documents to be circulated prior to the meeting (8 days) – –The coordinator is responsible for the minutes of the meeting (15 days) – –Location: flexible