Temporal baselines are needed for biodiversity, in order for the change in biodiversity to be measured over time, the targets for biodiversity conservation to be defined and conservation progress to be evaluated. Limited biodiversity information is widely recognized as a major barrier for identifying temporal baselines, although a comprehensive quantitative assessment of this is lacking. Here, we report on the temporal baselines that could be drawn from biodiversity monitoring schemes in Europe and compare those with the rise of important anthropogenic pressures. Most biodiversity monitoring schemes were initiated late in the 20th century, well after anthropogenic pressures had already reached half of their current magnitude. Setting temporal baselines from biodiversity monitoring data would therefore underestimate the full range of impacts of major anthropogenic pressures. In addition, biases among taxa and organization levels provide a truncated picture of biodiversity over time. These limitations need to be explicitly acknowledged when designing management strategies and policies as they seriously constrain our ability to identify relevant conservation targets aimed at restoring or reversing biodiversity losses. We discuss the need for additional research efforts beyond standard biodiversity monitoring to reconstruct the impacts of major anthropogenic pressures and to identify meaningful temporal baselines for biodiversity. ; This work was initiated under the framework of the FP7 project EU BON (contract 308454), which provided financial support to J.B.M., D.S.S., N.T., K.H. and N.B. Additional support was provided to L.B. and N.T. through the FORESTCAST project (CGL2014-59742, Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness of Spain).
Accurate mapping of open-pit mine areas is a prerequisite for the efficient resource management of extractive companies, but also detailed mapping is a requirement for public administrations, especially regarding the monitoring of restored areas. In previous works, our team has contributed to a better knowledge of the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) technologies for soil/vegetation restoration monitoring purposes, and in this work, we present a novel protocol to support combined interests of both private companies and governmental agencies. We introduce a case study in which we show the capability of multispectral sensors onboard of a low-weight multicopter to describe land cover typologies in restored areas (such as grass, scrubs, trees, topsoil and mine spoils) by applying remote sensing and GIS techniques. Moreover, we assess the capability of digital terrain models (Digital Elevation Model, Digital Surface Model, Digital Slope Model) derived from photogrammetric techniques, to provide useful and fast topographic information for the proper management of open-pit mine exploitation and restoration. By applying these techniques, we present a cost-effective workflow adequate to monitor land cover dynamics in restored areas, but also volumetric changes in stockpiles, waste dumps and extraction faces. This combined approach, supporting both environmental and industrial needs, aims to enhance the collaboration between sectors, establishing synergies, reducing costs by sharing knowledge, and adding transparency to their relation.
Science and society are increasingly interested in predicting the effects of global change and socio-economic development on natural systems, to ensure maintenance of both ecosystems and human well-being. The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services has identified the combination of ecological modelling and scenario forecasting as key to improving our understanding of those effects, by evaluating the relationships and feedbacks between direct and indirect drivers of change, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Using as case study the forests of the Mediterranean basin (complex socio-ecological systems of high social and conservation value), we reviewed the literature to assess (1) what are the modelling approaches most commonly used to predict the condition and trends of biodiversity and ecosystem services under future scenarios of global change, (2) what are the drivers of change considered in future scenarios and at what scales, and (3) what are the nature and ecosystem service indicators most commonly evaluated. Our review shows that forecasting studies make relatively little use of modelling approaches accounting for actual ecological processes and feedbacks between different socio-ecological sectors; predictions are generally made on the basis of a single (mainly climate) or a few drivers of change. In general, there is a bias in the set of nature and ecosystem service indicators assessed. In particular, cultural services and human well-being are greatly underrepresented in the literature. We argue that these shortfalls hamper our capacity to make the best use of predictive tools to inform decision-making in the context of global change. ; This work was supported by the Spanish Government through the INMODES project (grant number CGL2017-89999-C2-2-R), the ERA-NET FORESTERRA project INFORMED (grant number 29183), and the project Boscos Sans per a una Societat Saludable funded by Obra Social la Caixa (https://obrasociallacaixa.org/). AMO and AA were supported by Spanish Government through the "Juan de la Cierva" fellowship program (IJCI-2016-30349 and IJCI-2016-30049, respectively). JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and the FP7-Marie Curie-COFUND program of the European Commission (Grant "Clarín" ACA17-02).
The world's forests and forestry sector are facing unprecedented biological, political, social, and climatic challenges. The development of appropriate, novel forest management and restoration approaches that adequately consider uncertainty and adaptability are hampered by a continuing focus on production of a few goods or objectives, strong control of forest structure and composition, and most importantly the absence of a global scientific framework and long‐term vision. Ecosystem‐based approaches represent a step in the right direction, but are limited in their ability to deal with the rapid pace of social, climatic, and environmental changes. We argue here that viewing forest ecosystems as complex adaptive system provides a better alternative for both production‐ and conservation‐oriented forests and forestry. We propose a set of broad principles and changes to increase the adaptive capacity of forests in the face of future uncertainties. These span from expanding the sustained‐yield, single‐good paradigm to developing policy incentives and interventions that promote self‐organization and integrated social‐ecological adaptation. ; This research was supported by the Marie Curie IRSES Newforests Project (EU‐FP7–612645).
The implementation of the Ecosystem Services (ES) framework (including supply and demand) should be based on accurate spatial assessments to make it useful for land planning or environmental management. Despite the inherent dependence of ES assessments on the spatial resolution at which they are conducted, the studies analyzing these effects on ES supply and their relationships are still scarce. To study the influence of the spatial level of analysis on ES patterns and on the relationships among different ES, we selected seven indicators representing ES supply and three variables that describe forest cover and biodiversity for Catalonia (NE Iberian Peninsula). These indicators were estimated at three different scales: local, municipality and county. Our results showed differences in the ES patterns among the levels of analysis. The higher levels (municipality/county) removed part of the local heterogeneity of the patterns observed at the local scale, particularly for ES indicators characterized by a finely grained, scattered distribution. The relationships between ES indicators were generally similar at the three levels. However, some negative relationships (potential trade-offs) that were detected at the local level changed to positive (and significant) relationships at municipality and county. Spatial autocorrelation showed similarities between patterns at local and municipality levels, but differences with county level. We conclude that the use of high-resolution spatial data is preferable whenever available, in particular when identifying hotspots or trade-offs/synergies is of primary interest. When the main objective is describing broad patterns of ES, intermediate levels (e.g., municipality) are also adequate, as they conserve many of the properties of assessments conducted at finer scales, allowing the integration of data sources and, usually, being more directly relevant for policy-making. In conclusion, our results warn against the uncritical use of coarse (aggregated) spatial ES data and indicators in strategies for land use planning and forest conservation. ; We thank to the volunteers fromthe Catalan Ornithological Institute (ICO) and Dr. Miquel de Cáceres Ainsa for providing data for the analyses presented in this study. Funding was obtained from the Catalan Office for Climate Change (OCCC) through project ForESMap, from EU FORESTERRA program (INFORMED project) and from the Spanish government (CGL2013-46808-R and AGL2015-66001-C3-1-R). JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and the FP7-Marie Curie- COFUND program of the European Commission (Grant 'Clarín' ACA17- 02). We also thank the ECOMETAS (CGL2014-53840-REDT) network for support. This study also received funding fromthe European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme within the framework of the MultiFUNGtionality Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship (IF-EF) under grant agreement No. 655815 and from the Generalitat de Catalunya (Serra-Hunter Fellow grant number UdL-AG-203). We thank Gabriel Borras and Gemma Cantos (OCCC) for useful discussion during the elaboration of this work. We are very grateful to all persons who made the two Spanish Forest Inventories possible and, especially, to their main coordinators, Ramon Villaescusa (IFN2) and Jose Antonio Villanueva (IFN3). We also thank two anonymous reviewers who helped us improve the quality of the manuscript.
The Mediterranean Basin is considered one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, harbouring particularly high species richness and endemicity of taxonomic groups such as plants. This hotspot is unique at the global scale, because it has a history of intense anthropogenic influences that dates back to thousands of years, and where the current high-levels of biodiversity have thus been able to coexist with humans for millennia. Despite this long history of coexistence, biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basin is at risk due to a number of old and new anthropogenic stressors, including fast land use changes, overexploitation of natural resources, and global climate change. To tackle these problems, researchers should concentrate their efforts in answering questions that can have a true impact on the success of conservation programs, but there is at present considerable uncertainty on what these questions might be. To identify these questions, a group of scientists from Portugal, Spain, France, Greece, Italy and Israel have worked to identify priority questions that, if answered, would have a high probability of increasing the success of actions targeted at the conservation of Mediterranean biological diversity. This was part of a larger initiative covering the five Mediterranean regions of the world (Mediterranean Basin, California, Australia, Chile and South Africa), which was organised under the scope of the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) – Europe Section and the International Society of Mediterranean Ecologists (ISOMED). Here we present the first results of this exercise, which is expected to be extended in the near future to other countries in the Mediterranean Basin. The study was based on enquiries targeted at individuals from a number of stakeholder types, including research institutions, environmental non-governmental organizations, environmental consultancy companies, organizations linked to land management (e.g., farmers, hunters), governmental agencies, and large business corporations. We obtained replies from 92 respondents, which suggested a total of 830 questions, divided in 11 major topics. After eliminating questions that were out of scope given the objectives of the study, the three topics most referred to by respondents were related to governance, species management, and farming and forestry, while other important topics were public participation and social sciences, climate change, and impact assessment. The results obtained highlight the importance of interdisciplinary research linking natural and social scientists, which is needed to understand how environmental and socioeconomic drivers interact to shape biodiversity patterns and trends, and to develop and optimise the models of governance and public engagement that are required to preserve biodiversity in the face of such drivers. ; peerReviewed
Forest ecosystems provide a wide range of goods and services to society and host high levels of biodiversity. Nevertheless, forest ecosystem services (ES) are often quantified and assessed using simplified methodologies (e.g., proxy methods based exclusively on Land Use Land Cover maps) that introduce substantial uncertainty in the analysis by ignoring, for instance, the species composition and spatial configuration of the ecosystems studied. In this work we defined and calculated a set of 12 indicators of several ES for the forests of the highly populated region of Catalonia (North-eastern Iberian Peninsula). The indicators combined different sources of information such as forest surveys, ecological model predictions and official statistics, but also included additional land cover information. All ES indicators were aggregated at the municipality level to compare their values and distribution patterns. We assessed spatial trade-offs and synergies among ES, as well as their relationships with a set of socioeconomic, climatic and biodiversity variables using correlation analyses and mixed-effects models. The results suggest a clustering of provisioning and regulating ES in mountainous zones towards the North of the study area. These two types of services showed a high degree of spatial similarity and presented high positive correlations. In contrast, cultural ES showed a more scattered pattern, which included lower elevation areas in the South of the study region. Climatic conditions were the main determinants of the spatial variability in the supply of the different ES, with most indicators being positively associated with precipitation and negatively associated with temperature. In addition, biodiversity (particularly woody species richness) showed positive relations with most of these ES, while socioeconomic variables (such as population density and the percentage employment in agriculture) showed negative associations with most of them. The combination of information from different data sources (including primary data) allowed for a detailed analysis of forest ES, likely removing some of the problems derived from approaches based only on proxy methods. In addition, the use of municipalities as study unit makes results directly relevant to management and planning strategies operating at this scale (e.g., forest management and planning). ; Funding was obtained from the Catalan Office for Climate Change (OCCC) through project ForESMap, from EU FORESTERRA program (INFORMED project) and from the Spanish government (CGL2013-46808-R, AGL2015-66001-C3-1-R and CGL2014-59742). We also thank the ECOMETAS (CGL2014-53840-REDT) network for support. This study also received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme within the framework of the MultiFUNGtionality Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship (IF-EF) under grant agreement No655815 and from the Generalitat de Catalunya (Serra-Hunter Fellow). JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and the FP7-Marie Curie-COFUND program of the European Commission (Grant 'Clarín' ACA17-02).
Priorities for future sustainable development within Europe and Central Asia are formulated in visions by governments and societal actors. Integrated scenario and modelling studies enable the assessment of impacts on nature, nature's contributions to people, and a good quality of life resulting from these priorities, and help to co-design and codeliver appropriate pathways to sustainable futures (established but incomplete) (5.1.2, 5.4.2, 5.4.3, 5.5.2). Priorities for future sustainable development are captured in regional visions, which describe a future desired by society or parts of society in Europe and Central Asia. Matching these priorities to the Sustainable Development Goals and Aichi Biodiversity Targets revealed that regional priorities include sustainable economic growth in tandem with sustainable industrialization (Goal 8, Goal 9), sustainable agriculture, forestry, aquaculture and management of natural resources (Goal 15, Target 7), all promoted by sustainable consumption and production patterns (Goal 12, Target 4). Climate action and sustainable energy (Goal 13, Goal 7) are also priorities. Reduced inequalities (Goal 10), gender equality (Goal 5) and peace, justice and strong institutions (Goal 16), as well as representation of a diverse range of values, are less emphasized (established but incomplete) (5.1.2, 5.4.2, 5.4.3). Integrated assessments of future interactions between the priorities for sustainable development and nature and its contributions to people, which support proactive decisionmaking that anticipates change, mitigates undesirable trade-offs and fosters societal transformation in pursuit of a good quality of life, are rare due to the complexity of human and environment interdependencies (well established) (5.1.1, 5.3.1, 5.5.3, 5.5.4). Nevertheless, ignoring these complexities is likely to cause undesired trade-offs and to prevent the realization of synergies (5.3.1). Cross-sectoral and cross-scale integration of adaptation, mitigation and transformative actions and policies by multiple actors is key to the co-design and co-delivery of appropriate pathways to realize visions of future sustainable development (established but incomplete) (5.4.2, 5.4.3, 5.5.2, 5.5.3, 5.5.5, 5.5.6). The choices made by decision-makers and societal actors are expected to lead to large differences in future impacts on nature, nature's contributions to people, and good quality of life within Europe and Central Asia (established but incomplete) (5.2.3, 5.3.3, 5.3.4). More positive impacts are projected under futures that assume proactive decision-making on environmental issues and promote a more holistic approach to managing human and environmental systems which supports multifunctionality and multiple contributions from nature to people (established but incomplete) (5.2.3, 5.3.3, 5.3.4). Projecting historical trends into the future under a businessas- usual scenario results in stable trends in nature (e.g. reflected in biodiversity vulnerability indices), negative trends in nature's regulating contributions (e.g. regulation of climate or hazards and extreme events) and mixed trends in nature's material contributions (e.g. food production) (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Different assumptions about future trends in drivers lead to widely varying projected impacts on nature, nature's contributions to people and a good quality of life. Under economic optimism scenarios, where global developments are steered by economic growth and environmental problems are only dealt with when solutions are of economic interest, an increase in the provision of most of nature's material contributions to people (e.g. food and timber) is projected associated with a general decline in nature and its regulating contributions to people (e.g. air and water quality regulation) (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Under regional competition scenarios there is a growing gap between rich and poor, increasing problems with crime, violence and terrorism, and strong trade barriers. Consequently, its impacts are highly mixed with generally large declines in nature (e.g. habitat maintenance and creation) and the most negative impacts of all scenarios on nature's non-material contributions to people (e.g. learning and inspiration) and good quality of life indicators (e.g. health and well-being) (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Inequality scenarios, which assume increasing economic, political and social inequalities, where power becomes concentrated in a relatively small political and business elite who invest in green technology, result in negative impacts on nature's regulating contributions to people (established CHAPTER 5. CURRENT AND FUTURE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN NATURE AND SOCIETY 575 but incomplete), but mixed or unclear impacts on other indicators (inconclusive) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Under global sustainable development scenarios, which are characterized by an increasingly proactive attitude of global policymakers towards environmental issues and a high level of regulation, positive impacts are projected for nature and its regulating contributions to people. Predominantly positive trends are also projected for nature's material contributions to people and good quality of life indicators, with some regional variation (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Under regional sustainability scenarios, which show increased concern for environmental and social sustainability and a shift toward local and regional decision-making, similar impacts are projected as for global sustainable development. Regional sustainability, however, leads to slightly fewer benefits for nature's regulating and material contributions to people (with decreases in food provision) than global sustainable development and more positive impacts on nature's non-material contributions to people and good quality of life, particularly traditional knowledge and supporting identities reflecting the local focus of the regional sustainability scenario (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Trade-offs between nature and different contributions from nature to people are projected under all plausible futures for Europe and Central Asia (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.3.4). How these trade-offs are resolved depends on political and societal value judgements within each plausible future. In general, those futures where environmental issues are mainstreamed across sectors are more successful in mitigating undesirable cross-sector trade-offs, resulting in positive impacts across a broad range of indicators concerning nature, nature's contributions to people and good quality of life indicators (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Trade-offs between nature's material and regulating contributions to people are commonly projected in the economic optimism and regional competition scenarios, which tend to promote a limited number of nature's material contributions to people. For example, increases in food provision (generally associated with the expansion of agricultural land or the intensification of livestock production and fish captures) are often associated with decreases in the provision of nature's regulating contributions to people (e.g. prevention of soil erosion, regulation of water quality and quantity) and nature values. Similar trade-offs were projected between increases in timber provision and decreases in nature's regulating (e.g. carbon sequestration) and non-material (e.g. aesthetic value) contributions to people. Such trade-offs lead to strong positive effects in nature's contributions to people with market values and negative effects in nature's contributions to people without market values (established but incomplete) (5.3.3, 5.6.1). Trade-offs were also apparent under the sustainability scenario archetypes, particularly in relation to the use of land and water (e.g. effects of agricultural extensification – the opposite of agricultural intensification - or increases in bioenergy croplands on other land uses and biodiversity) (established but incomplete) (5.6.1). However, such scenarios proactively deal with such trade-offs through, for example, political choices aiming to maximize synergizes through mainstreaming and multifunctionality (global sustainable development) or through societal choices to live less resource-intensive lifestyles and, hence, reduce demand for nature's material contributions to people (regional sustainability). Impacts of plausible futures differ across the regions of Europe and Central Asia. Hence, regional and national decision-makers face different trade-offs between nature and its various contributions to people. Cooperation between countries opens up possibilities to mitigate undesirable crossscale impacts and to capitalize on opportunities (established but incomplete) (5.3.3). In Central Asia, significant water shortages are projected in the long-term. This affects farmers' choices between intensive crop production and more sustainable production with resulting impacts on nature's regulating contributions to people, such as water quality (established but incomplete) (5.3.3). Similar impacts on water stress are projected under future scenarios for Central Europe, including decreases in multiple contributions from nature to people from wetlands (established but incomplete) (5.3.3). Transboundary and integrated water management strategies that protect minimum water levels for the environment are projected to mitigate these negative impacts. In Eastern Europe, particularly Russia, trade-offs between wood extraction and carbon sequestration are projected. Sustainable forest management and reforestation of areas set aside from agricultural activities are suggested as having the potential to mitigate such trade-offs. Similarly, in mountain systems in Central and Western Europe and in marine systems in all subregions adaptive management strategies are projected to address the vulnerability of the majority of nature's contributions to people (established but incomplete) (5.3.3). In the European Union (EU), significant differences between northern and southern countries are projected. Most scenarios indicate increases in agricultural production for food, feed and bioenergy for northern European Union countries, while decreases in agricultural and timber production, as well as increases in water stress, are projected for southern European Union countries. The latter is projected to have considerable negative impacts on nature's non-material contributions to people, such as national heritage and tourism-related services dependent on local food production. Scenarios which included international coordination of adaptive measures across THE REGIONAL ASSESSMENT REPORT ON BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FOR EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA 576 geographical areas were projected to have better capacity to cope with, or mitigate, undesirable cross-scale impacts (established but incomplete) (5.3.3). Future impacts of drivers of change on nature and its contributions to people in Europe and Central Asia are likely to be underestimated because scenario studies are dominated by a few individual drivers (e.g. climate change) and often omit other important drivers (e.g. pollution) that may adversely affect their impacts (well established) (5.2.2, 5.3.2). Scenario studies predominantly focus on single direct drivers and fail to capture interactions between drivers (well established) (5.2.2, 5.3.2). Climate change is the most represented single direct driver in scenarios of biodiversity and ecosystem change. By contrast other direct drivers, such as pollution and invasive alien species, which are known to have an adverse impact on nature and its contributions to people, are poorly represented in scenario studies (well established) (5.2.2). Single-driver scenarios fail to capture various dynamics such as feedbacks and synergies between and amongst indirect and direct drivers operating at different scales. Policy approaches that consider single drivers or single sectors are unlikely to successfully address environmental problems as they do not consider trade-offs between different drivers, impacts and responses. Integrated, multi-driver scenario studies offer a more realistic assessment of impacts to inform robust decision-making about future sustainable development pathways that avoid unintended consequences (established but incomplete) (5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.4, 5.3.1, 5.3.3, 5.3.4, 5.4.4, 5.4.5, 5.5.5). Priorities for future sustainable development expressed by governments and other societal actors for Europe and Central Asia are more widely achieved under plausible futures that consider a diverse range of values (established but incomplete) (5.3.4, 5.5.4, 5.5.5, 5.6.1). Recognizing the different time frame of the scenarios of plausible futures (often 2050 or later) to those stated in the Sustainable Development Goals and Aichi Biodiversity Targets (2030 or 2020), continuing current trends under a business-as-usual scenario is estimated to lead to failure in achieving most of the Sustainable Development Goals (13 out of 17), but mixed effects on achieving the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (8 achieved). Economic optimism is estimated to have a mixed level of success in achieving the goals (8 achieved), but would fail to achieve the majority of the targets (16 out of 20), while regional competition fails to reach the majority of all goals and targets (15 and 19, respectively). The focus of these scenarios on instrumental values and individualistic perspectives, with little acknowledgement of relational or intrinsic values, means they are unlikely to offer effective sustainable solutions to environmental and social challenges (established but incomplete) (5.3.4, 5.6.1). In contrast, the sustainability scenarios (regional sustainability and global sustainable development) are estimated to achieve the majority of the Sustainable Development Goals and Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Such scenarios attempt to support nature and its multiple nature's contributions to people and aspects of a good quality of life. Thus, they represent a greater diversity of values, but often at the acceptance of lower, or more extensive, production of nature's material contributions to people (established but incomplete) (5.3.4, 5.6.1). Multiple alternative pathways exist to achieve the priorities for future sustainable development set by governments and societal actors within Europe and Central Asia and in particular for mitigating tradeoffs between nature and nature's contributions to people (established but incomplete) (5.5.2). The most promising pathways include long-term societal transformation through continuous education, knowledge sharing and participatory decisionmaking. Such pathways emphasize nature's regulating contributions to people and the importance of relational values in facilitating a holistic and systematic consideration of nature and nature´s contribution to people across sectors and scales (established but incomplete) (5.5.3, 5.5.4). Four types of pathways have been developed to address trade-offs between food, water, energy, climate and biodiversity at different scales (5.5.2). Green economy pathways focus on sustainable intensification and diversification of production activities coupled with the protection and restoration of nature. Low carbon transformation pathways focus on biofuel production, reforestation and forest management. Both types of pathways include actions related to technological innovation, land sparing or land sharing. Green economy and low carbon transformation pathways do not fully mitigate trade-offs between nature's material contributions to people, nature conservation, and nature's regulating and non-material contributions to people (established but incomplete) (5.5.2, 5.5.4). Ecotopian solutions pathways focus on radical social innovation to achieve local food and energy self-sufficiency and the production of multiple contributions from nature to people. They include actions on multifunctionality within individual land uses with connecting green infrastructure, urban design and food production (established but incomplete) (5.5.2, 5.5.4). Transition movements pathways emphasize a change towards relational values, promoting resource-sparing lifestyles, continuous education, new urban spatial structures and innovative forms of agriculture where different knowledge systems are combined with technological innovation. Transformation is achieved through local empowerment, participatory decision-making processes, community actions and voluntary agreements. As opposed to other pathways, transition movements CHAPTER 5. CURRENT AND FUTURE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN NATURE AND SOCIETY 577 pathways address all of the Sustainable Development Goals identified as being important in the Europe and Central Asia visions (5.1.2, 5.5.4), except Goal 7 (sustainable energy). The narrative offers the broadest set of actions targeting elements of nature, multiple contributions from nature to people (material, regulating and non-material) and multiple dimensions of a good quality of life (established but incomplete) (5.5.2, 5.5.4, 5.6.1). Different sets of actions and combinations of policy instruments are suggested by the different pathways. Joint instruments suggested across pathways give priority to participation, education and awareness raising, and often cross-scale integration and mainstreaming of environmental objectives across sectors (established but incomplete) (5.5.2, 5.5.3, 5.5.4, 5.5.6). The green economy and low carbon transformation pathways build towards sustainability without challenging the economic growth paradigm. They are implemented through combinations of top-down legal and regulatory instruments mixed with economic and financial instruments designed at regional (European Union) or national levels (Eastern Europe and Central Asia). Such pathways are often formulated at a sectoral level, and integration across sectoral pathways is critical. However, because green economy and low carbon transformation pathways do not fully mitigate trade-offs, they may not be sufficient alone to achieve sustainability (established but incomplete) (5.5.2, 5.5.4, 5.6.1). The trade-offs are better addressed by diverse local bottom-up transition movements or ecotopian solutions pathways (5.5.2). Such pathways reconsider fundamental values and lifestyles through sets of actions focusing on less resource-intensive lifestyles, education, knowledge sharing, good social relations and equity (e.g. food and dietary patterns, transport, energy and consumption patterns). Transition movements pathways also develop bottom-up transformative capabilities by combining rights-based instruments and customary norms (including indigenous and local knowledge) and social and information instruments (established but incomplete) (5.5.3, 5.5.4). The sets of actions proposed in the pathways are not mutually exclusive and can be combined. For example, actions from green economy and low carbon transformation pathways may pave the way towards more transformative transition movements pathways. Moreover, future transitions to sustainability may be fostered through cross-scale integration and mainstreaming of environmental issues into sectoral policies and decisions, along with nurturing diverse social, institutional and technological experiments (established but incomplete) (5.5.5). Participatory scenario, vision and pathway development is a powerful approach for knowledge co-production and has great potential for the explicit inclusion of indigenous and local knowledge (established but incomplete) (5.4.3, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, 5.5.6, 5.6.2). Many scenario, vision and pathways exercises include local stakeholders and their valuable knowledge and practices. However, the use of different knowledge systems, such as indigenous and local knowledge, was rarely explicitly mentioned in studies (5.6.2). Explicit examples that included indigenous and local knowledge (see Boxes 5.2, 5.6 and 5.10), show a clear added value from combining different forms of knowledge with technological innovations, and cultural diversity, norms and customary rights when pursuing goals of sustainable development (5.2.2, 5.5.2, 5.5.3, 5.5.6). Knowledge gaps and resulting uncertainties in exploring future interactions between nature and society are substantial because integrated assessments of future impacts on nature, nature's contributions to people and a good quality of life that take account of the complex interdependencies in human and environmental systems are rare (well established) (5.6.2). Very few studies were available for Central Asia and to a lesser extent for Eastern Europe (well established) (5.6.2). Less information was also available for marine systems than for terrestrial and freshwater systems (well established) (5.6.2). Few integrated scenario and modelling studies include indicators of nature's nonmaterial contributions to people and good quality of life (5.3.2, 5.5.1, 5.6.2) and therefore existing assessments of synergies and trade-offs are limited in the interactions and feedbacks they represent (well established) (5.3.2). No studies were found that assessed future flows of nature's contributions to people across countries, which would have been important to assess the impacts of the scenarios and pathways for Europe and Central Asia on other parts of the world (well established) (5.6.2). There is also a significant gap in the current literature in recognizing the diversity of values, with the focus being mainly on instrumental values (well established) (5.6.2). Finally, scenario and modelling studies include many uncertainties in their projections of the future resulting from input data, scenario assumptions, model structure and propagation of uncertainties across the integrated components of the systems, which should be borne in mind when interpreting their results (well established).
Social-ecological systems in the Mediterranean Basin are characterised by high biodiversity and a prolonged cultural influence, leading to the co-evolution of these systems. The unique characteristics of Mediterranean social-ecological systems, current pressures leading to a decline in ecosystem services, and the need for coordinated action are recognised by policies promoting the protection and sustainable use of the region's heritage. Ecosystem assessments provide valuable information on the capacity of the Mediterranean Basin to ensure the well-being of its population. However, most assessments simplify the complexity of these systems, which may lead to inaccurate ecosystem services supply and flow estimations. This paper uses the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model to guide an expert consultation that identifies the key characteristics of the Mediterranean social-ecological systems and analyses how these should be included in ecosystem assessments. Data collection was carried out through expert consultation with ecosystem services researchers. Multiple sources of complexity were identified, including the relationship between historical human activities, biodiversity spatio-temporal patterns, as well as the seasonal and long-term variability in ecosystem services. The importance of incorporating this complexity in ecosystem assessments for evidence-based decision-making is identified, suggesting that there is a need to adapt assessment approaches for the Mediterranean Basin social-ecological systems. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 809988. JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and FP7-Marie Curie-COFUND European Commission program (Grant 'Clarín' ACA17-02). SdM benefited from a Serra-Húnter Fellowship provided by the Generalitat of Catalonia.
In this report, we present the analysis of the different available biodiversity data streams at the EU and national level, both baseline biodiversity data and monitoring data. We assess how these biodiversity data inform and trigger policy action and identify the related challenges the different European countries and relevant EU agencies face and the solutions to overcome them. To do this, we consulted with more than 350 expert stakeholders from policy, research and practice. The assessment identified a fragmented biodiversity data landscape that cannot currently easily answer all relevant policy questions. Quantity and quality of biodiversity baseline datasets differ for the different countries, ranging from non-existent biodiversity monitoring due to capacity issues, to regular monitoring of ecosystem processes and state. By engaging stakeholders and experts in both member states and non-member states and from several EU bodies, we identified key challenges and ways to address these with targeted solutions towards building a joint European Biodiversity Monitoring Network. Solutions include focussing on cooperation and coordination, enhanced data standardisation and sharing, as well as the use of models and new technologies. These solutions can however only be realised with dedicated funding and capacity building, in coordination with all stakeholders in partnership.
We would like to thank the participants of the Mediterranean Working Group workshop held at the 2016 European Ecosystem Services Partnership conference in Antwerp, and the Ecosystem Services Partnership for the support to the Mediterranean Working Group. MVB acknowledges funding from the ReNature project. JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and FP7-Marie Curie-COFUND European Commission program (Grant 'Clarín' ACA17-02). SdM benefited from a Serra-Húnter Fellowship provided by the Generalitat of Catalonia. ; Social-ecological systems in the Mediterranean Basin are characterised by high biodiversity and a prolonged cultural influence, leading to the co-evolution of these systems. The unique characteristics of Mediterranean social-ecological systems, current pressures leading to a decline in ecosystem services, and the need for coordinated action are recognised by policies promoting the protection and sustainable use of the region's heritage. Ecosystem assessments provide valuable information on the capacity of the Mediterranean Basin to ensure the well-being of its population. However, most assessments simplify the complexity of these systems, which may lead to inaccurate ecosystem services supply and flow estimations. This paper uses the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model to guide an expert consultation that identifies the key characteristics of the Mediterranean social-ecological systems and analyses how these should be included in ecosystem assessments. Data collection was carried out through expert consultation with ecosystem services researchers. Multiple sources of complexity were identified, including the relationship between historical human activities, biodiversity spatio-temporal patterns, as well as the seasonal and long-term variability in ecosystem services. The importance of incorporating this complexity in ecosystem assessments for evidence-based decision-making is identified, suggesting that there is a need to adapt assessment approaches for the Mediterranean Basin social-ecological systems. ; publishersversion ; published
Social-ecological systems in the Mediterranean Basin are characterised by high biodiversity and a prolonged cultural influence, leading to the co-evolution of these systems. The unique characteristics of Mediterranean social-ecological systems, current pressures leading to a decline in ecosystem services, and the need for coordinated action are recognised by policies promoting the protection and sustainable use of the region's heritage. Ecosystem assessments provide valuable information on the capacity of the Mediterranean Basin to ensure the well-being of its population. However, most assessments simplify the complexity of these systems, which may lead to inaccurate ecosystem services supply and flow estimations. This paper uses the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model to guide an expert consultation that identifies the key characteristics of the Mediterranean social-ecological systems and analyses how these should be included in ecosystem assessments. Data collection was carried out through expert consultation with ecosystem services researchers. Multiple sources of complexity were identified, including the relationship between historical human activities, biodiversity spatio-temporal patterns, as well as the seasonal and long-term variability in ecosystem services. The importance of incorporating this complexity in ecosystem assessments for evidence-based decision-making is identified, suggesting that there is a need to adapt assessment approaches for the Mediterranean Basin social-ecological systems. ; We would like to thank the participants of the Mediterranean Working Group workshop held at the 2016 European Ecosystem Services Partnership conference in Antwerp, and the Ecosystem Services Partnership for the support to the Mediterranean Working Group. MVB acknowledges funding from the ReNature project. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 809988. JVRD was supported by the Government of Asturias and FP7-MarieCurie-COFUND European Commission program (Grant'Clarín'ACA17-02). SdM benefited from a Serra-Húnter Fellowship provided by the Generalitat of Catalonia.
Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly proposed to support conservation decision making. However, evidence of SDMs supporting solutions for on‐ground conservation problems is still scarce in the scientific literature. Here, we show that successful examples exist but are still largely hidden in the grey literature, and thus less accessible for analysis and learning. Furthermore, the decision framework within which SDMs are used is rarely made explicit. Using case studies from biological invasions, identification of critical habitats, reserve selection and translocation of endangered species, we propose that SDMs may be tailored to suit a range of decision‐making contexts when used within a structured and transparent decision‐making process. To construct appropriate SDMs to more effectively guide conservation actions, modellers need to better understand the decision process, and decision makers need to provide feedback to modellers regarding the actual use of SDMs to support conservation decisions. This could be facilitated by individuals or institutions playing the role of 'translators' between modellers and decision makers. We encourage species distribution modellers to get involved in real decision‐making processes that will benefit from their technical input; this strategy has the potential to better bridge theory and practice, and contribute to improve both scientific knowledge and conservation outcomes. ; AG's stay in Brisbane, Australia, was supported by the CSIRO McMaster Foundation. The three workshops (held on December 2011, April and May 2012) that led to this publication were organised with financial support and within the framework of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (CEED; http://www.ceed.edu.au) led by HPP. AG benefitted from insights from a project on applying SDMs to invasive management in Switzerland granted by the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment (FOEN) and the National Centre for Competence in Research (NCCR) 'Plant Survival' in Neuchâtel. LB benefitted from support from the Catalan Government (CARTOBIO and 2010‐BE‐272 projects) and the EU‐FP7 SCALES (#226852) to attend the workshops.
Maximizing the area under biodiversity‐related conservation measures is a main target of the European Union (EU) Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. We analyzed whether agrienvironmental schemes (AES) within EU common agricultural policy, special protected areas for birds (SPAs), and Annex I designation within EU Birds Directive had an effect on bird population changes using monitoring data from 39 farmland bird species from 1981 to 2012 at EU scale. Populations of resident and short‐distance migrants were larger with increasing SPAs and AES coverage, while Annex I species had higher population growth rates with increasing SPAs, indicating that SPAs may contribute to the protection of mainly target species and species spending most of their life cycle in the EU. Because farmland birds are in decline and the negative relationship of agricultural intensification with their population growth rates was evident during the implementation of AES and SPAs, EU policies seem to generally attenuate the declines of farmland bird populations, but not to reverse them. ; PECBMS is supported financially by the RSPB and the European Commission. TT was supported by Institutional Research Plan (RVO: 68081766), SH and LB were supported by EUBON project (308454; FP7‐ENV‐2012 European Commission) and the TRUSTEE project (RURAGRI ERA‐NET 235175), and AL received financial support from the Academy of Finland (project 275606).
