Spatial prioritisation of EU's LIFE-Nature programme to strengthen the conservation impact of Natura 2000
Spatial prioritisation of EU's LIFE-Nature programme to strengthen the conservation impact of Natura 2000
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/1365-2664.13116
复制
发表时间：
2018-07-01
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
Brotons, Lluis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hermoso, Virgilio;Villero, Dani;Brotons, Lluis
1.尽管近几十年来欧洲在养护方面取得了进展，但评估结果突出表明，需要建立适当的筹资机制，以支持作为欧盟生物多样性战略核心的Natura 2000网络。除了需要更多的投资（目前仅占网络估计成本的五分之一），更好地规划这项投资有助于更好地实现保护目标。我们展示了一种可用于识别Natura 2000优先地点及其物种的方法，这可以指导未来的投资。我们首先使用与每个Natura 2000站点相关的关键物种列表来绘制鸟类和鸟类指令所涵盖的所有优先物种的分布图。然后，我们使用Marxan软件优先分配所有Natura 2000网站之间的保护资金，同时试图模仿观察到的保护工作下实施的生命计划，欧盟的生物多样性战略的主要金融工具，在1992年至2013年期间。一些Natura 2000网站显示出特殊的价值，拥有网络中其他地方没有或很少出现的物种。这些优先地点主要集中在岛屿上以及欧洲大陆的西南、东部和北方极端，从而反映了物种丰富度和特有性的模式。我们发现这里确定的优先事项与以前的生命-自然项目中资金分配方式之间的关系很差。政策影响。我们建议，像这里所示的优先级排序练习可以用来通知自上而下的欧盟监管机制，提供网站和物种的优先级，更好地反映欧洲的保护需求的列表。这些建议在大陆范围内实施，可以帮助指导会员国的LIFE项目提案，并填补目前在优先物种覆盖方面的空白。这种自上而下的控制机制可以整合到当前的预算分配体系中，而不是完全取代它，以提高欧盟保护投资的效率和实现欧洲大陆的目标。
1. Despite advances in conservation efforts within Europe during recent decades, assessments highlight a need for adequate financing mechanisms to support the Natura 2000 network, the centrepiece of the EU's Biodiversity Strategy. Besides the need for greater investment (currently only covering a fifth of the estimated cost of the network), better planning for this investment could help better achieve conservation goals.2. We demonstrate a method that could be used to identify priority Natura 2000 sites, and species therein, that could guide investment in the future. We first used the lists of key species associated with each Natura 2000 site to map the distribution of all priority species covered by the Birds and Habitats Directives. We then used Marxan software to prioritise allocation of conservation funds among all Natura 2000 sites, while trying to mimic the observed conservation effort implemented under the LIFE programme, the main financial tool of the EU's Biodiversity Strategy, in the period 1992-2013.3. Some Natura 2000 sites show exceptional value, holding species that either do not, or only very rarely, occur elsewhere in the network. These priority sites were concentrated mainly on islands and in the south western, eastern and northern extremes of Europe's mainland, thus reflecting patterns in species richness and endemism.4. We found a poor relationship between the priorities identified here and the way funds had been distributed in previous LIFE-Nature programmes.5. Policy implications. We propose that prioritisation exercises like the one shown here could be used to inform a top-down EU regulation mechanism by providing lists of site and species priorities that better reflect European conservation needs. These recommendations, performed at continental scale, could then help guide LIFE project proposals from the Member States and fill the current gap in the coverage of priority species. This top-down control mechanism could be integrated in the current system of budget distribution, rather than replacing it completely, to enhance the efficiency of conservation investment in the EU and achievement of continental goals.