Most Habitat’s and Species’ Assessments in German Natura 2000 Sites Reflect Unfavourable Conservation States
Originally published in Basic and Applied Ecology by Julia S. Ellerbrok, Theresa Spatz, Veronika Braunisch, Michael Strohbach, Dagmar Haase, Kathrin Januschke, Josef Kaiser, Marion Mehring, Thilo Wellmann, Helge Bruelheide, Jori Maylin Marx, Josef Settele, Christian Wirth, Nina Farwig.
What follows is a Preamble, authored by one of the authors, Michael Strohbach, PhD, along with the article’s Abstract.
Preamble
Natura 2000 is a network of protected areas in the European Union established by legislation in 1992. Protection under Natura 2000 often allows — and sometimes even requires — continued land use, because many sites are remnants of former “cultural landscapes,” for example areas with traditional, extensive agriculture. In recent decades, the number of protected sites and the area they cover has grown, and Natura 2000 is one of the EU’s major conservation successes. It has not been without critics, however. Climate‐change impacts were not anticipated when the network was designed in the early 1990s, and it can be difficult to manage sites so as to replicate land‐use practices from past decades and centuries. Both issues contribute to inadequate or bad conservation status.
This new study, which I contributed to, assessed 1,049 sites and found that most have an inadequate or bad conservation status; only 4 or 6 percent achieved a favourable status (depending on whether assessed by presence of desired habitats or species, respectively). Sites in urban areas were not in worse condition than those in rural areas, but not a single one had a favourable status. We conclude that the management of the sites needs to be optimized: both too intensive and too extensive use and management contribute to inadequate and bad conservation status. Monitoring of the impact of management is not adequate for evidence-based recommendations, however, and we call for improving the monitoring scheme.
Abstract
The Convention on Biological Diversity aims to protect 30 % of the Earth’s land and marine surface to promote biodiversity. In the European Union, conservation areas are mainly placed under protection through the Habitats Directive. These so-called Natura 2000 sites currently cover 18.6 % of Europe’s land area. Obligatory status reports enable a broad-scale analysis of conservation states to investigate if biodiversity is in the favourable conservation status demanded by the directive and which factors may be inhibiting. With focus on Germany, we evaluated the conservation states of habitat types and species groups as assessed in standard data forms and related it to drivers commonly reported for the sites, e.g., land-use practices, protected area size and time since designation. Our results are based on assessments from 23 % (1049) of Germany’s Natura 2000 sites protected under the Habitats Directive and show that only 6 % of habitats’ and 4 % of species’ assessments report a favourable conservation status. A review of the reported drivers showed that most negative influences on Natura 2000 sites were attributed to agricultural and forestry activities, as well as natural system modifications, while for both land-use types also practices with positive impact were listed. For habitats, conservation status was better in Natura 2000 sites that were established earlier than later. For both habitats and species, more favourable conservation states were overall related to larger area sizes and the absence of direct land use (agriculture, forestry). Our results highlight that a high proportion of protected areas alone does not suffice to infer successes for biodiversity conservation when land-use activities continue to affect target species or their habitats. Increased conversation efforts for Natura 2000 areas will be required to meet the goals of the recently implemented EU Nature Restoration Law.
Michael Strohbach, PhD is a PAN Works Fellow and landscape ecologist with an urban focus. His expertise is in green infrastructure, ecosystem services, urban biodiversity, and cultural landscapes. Michael is fascinated by how humans have shaped ecosystems and communities in the past, what lessons we can learn from these experiences, and what role humans ought to play in nature.
Nicole Roberts is the Associate Editor for PAN Works and provided editorial support for this essay.
Please visit PAN Works for more about our work on ethics and animal wellbeing.
