mainstreaming biodiversity in the EU Laure Ledoux Biodiversity - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Tools and approaches for mainstreaming biodiversity in the EU Laure Ledoux Biodiversity Unit, DG Environment, European Commission International Expert Workshop on Biodiversity Mainstreaming, Mexico City, Mexico, 17-19 November 2015

Outline  Mainstreaming in the EU biodiversity strategy: agriculture and fisheries/marine  Mid-term review of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020  Financing and tracking biodiversity-related expenditure  MAES and natural capital accounting

2050 Vision 2020 headline target

EU biodiversity mid-term review (1) Policy frameworks in place and progress under each  target A wealth of positive experience to build on  Insufficient scale and timelag for measurable  improvement in the state of biodiversity Targets can only be reached if implementation and enforcement efforts become considerably bolder and more ambitious, and integration effective. At the current rate of implementation, biodiversity loss will continue in the EU and globally, with significant implications for the capacity of ecosystems to meet human needs in the future.

EU biodiversity mid-term review (2) Strong partnerships and full engagement of key actors:  1. Complete and manage effectively Natura 2000 2. Implement Invasive Alien Species Regulation 3. Recognize natural capital throughout the EU Effective integration with a wide range of policies:  • Coherent priorities and adequate funding • Agriculture and forestry • Marine and fisheries • Regional development Achieving biodiversity objectives can contribute to the growth and jobs agenda , food and water security and quality of life , as well as to the SDG implementation.

1. Financing biodiversity in the EU budget  Mainstreaming climate and biodiversity in the EU budget: integral part of all main instruments. Focus on Natura 2000 network and green infrastructure  LIFE instrument: limited in size but key role for biodiversity • Traditional projects for nature and biodiversity • Integrated Projects for implementing EU legislation – integrating different sources of funding • Financial instruments: Natural Capital Financing Facility to leverage funding from the private sector  Importance of tracking to assess effectiveness

2016 draft EU budget

Natural Capital Financing Facility (NCFF) Rationale: Too little financing for biodiversity and climate change adaptation, whilst business opportunities remain unexploited Objectives: address market failures and demonstrate to private investors the attractiveness of revenue-generating or cost-saving natural capital projects; leverage funding from private investors for investments in ecosystems and ecosystem-based solutions to climate change adaptation. € 100-125 million Investment facility during 2015-2017 for 9-12 operations Executed by EIB; EU contribution: € 60 million Project categories: Payments for ecosystem services, Green infrastructure projects, Pro-biodiversity and pro-adaptation businesses, Projects involving biodiversity offsets

NCFF Structure LIFE EIB Environment / Climate NATURAL CAPITAL FINANCING FACILITY Co-investors TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE private and/or FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS public EUR 100-125m  EUR 50m First Loss for EIB EUR 10m Project Investments level DIRECT INVESTMENTS IN PROJECTS INTERMEDIATED INVESTMENTS : Private Equity Funds, Credit Lines to Banks 9

2. Mapping and Assessing Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) and Natural Capital Accounting in the EU • EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020: – Action 5: Member States, with the assistance of the Commission, will map and assess the state of ecosystems and their services in their national territory by 2014, assess the economic value of such services, and promote the integration of these values into accounting and reporting systems at EU and national level by 2020. • EU 7 th Environmental Action Programme (7 th EAP): – Objective 1: 'protect, conserve and enhance the European Union’s natural capital' – Objective 5: build environmental knowledge base Eurostat

MAES overall conceptual framework

What do we need for ecosystem accounting in the EU? • We need biophysical accounts • for direct use and as a basis for valuation studies, upscaling • We need an EU data layer of accounts • reference frame for countries • data foundation for responding to EU policies • Key Policy issue: • measure changes in our natural capital stock and what impacts it has on our economy and society. • assess the extent and condition of ecosystems that is needed so that they can carry on delivering essential services to our economy and society Eurostat

What is the challenge? Many different & separate & expensive data collection exercises which are not tailored to mapping and assessing ecosystems and which are undertaken by different institutions COPERNICUS Biodiversity (satellite LUCAS (ground monitoring images) observation) Corine Forest Water Framework Land statistics Farm Structure Directive reporting Cover Survey (agricultural census) Natura 2000 reporting … Eurostat

What is the potential solution ? • A system of nested and datasets within a common framework; • Integration of existing initiatives – assessment of ecosystems, modelling ecosystem services…; • Use of models to transfer data into accounts and fill data gaps Land Ecosystem data use/cover Copernicus Natura Land LUCAS data 2000/CDDA monitoring Forest In situ stats coordination Environmental Ecosystem reporting mapping FSS (extent) Ecosystem condition (state) Biodiversity assessments (monitoring) Eurostat

Project KIP INCA • Knowledge Innovation Project on Integrated System for Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services Accounting in the EU • Project developed by a partnership of European Commission services (DG ENV, DG CLIMA, DG JRC, DG ESTAT, DG RTD and EEA) • Objective to strengthen the knowledge base for the implementation of the 7 th EAP • Knowledge Innovation Projects (KIPs) have the ambition to address gaps in environmental knowledge , using an innovate approach 17 September 2015 MAES Working Group 15 Eurostat

Where does KIP INCA fit in? • KIP INCA provides a shared data platform to record the extent, condition and trends in ecosystems and their services. • KIP INCA uses a fit-for-purpose approach based on existing, EU-wide data collections (LUCAS, Copernicus, MAES, administrative data, etc.) • KIP INCA integrates all available data and makes sure new data fit into the system (-> permanent improvement). • KIP INCA accounts follow UN accounting standards (SEEA and SNA) • KIP INCA tests SEEA – EEA (but is not limited to SEEA – EEA = innovation) • EU Member States can link their national systems to KIP INCA. Eurostat

Expected outcomes of KIP INCA, Phase 1 • A blueprint for the future INCA including the sets of tables and accounts, the input data layers, some mock-up accounts for illustration and a description of the limitations • A dialogue with stakeholders (EU member states, researchers, policy makers, other users) • A reliable estimate of necessary resources • An implementation plan until 2020 • A plan for improving the data sources Eurostat

Existing potential input layers: MAES activities (ecosystem extent) Ecosystem Total ecosystem EUNIS Level 1 EUNIS Level 2 type coverage % area Area (km 2 ) EUNIS level 2 per level 1 J1 Buildings of cities, towns and villages 102151 46.08 J2 Low density buildings 94150 42.47 J3 Extractive industrial sites 6453 2.91 J Constructed, industrial and Urban J4 Transport networks and other constructed other artificial habitats 16100 7.26 hard-surface areas J5 Highly artificial man-made waters and 1828 0.82 associated structures J6 Waste deposits 998 0.45 I Regularly or recently I1 Arable land and market gardens 1243168 99.18 cultivated agricultural , Cropland horticultural and domestic I2 Cultivated areas of gardens and parks 10292 0.82 habitats E1 Dry grasslands 9330 1.35 E2 Mesic grasslands 571931 82.48 55771 8.04 E3 Seasonally wet and wet grasslands E Grasslands and land E4 alpine and subalpine grasslands 21128 3.05 Grassland dominated by forbs, mosses or lichens E5 Woodland fringes, clearings and tall forbs 0 0.00 stands E6 Inland salt steppes 3043 0.44 E7 sparsely wooded grasslands 32195 4.64 G1 Broadleaved deciduous woodland 487970 28.29 G2 Broadleaved evergreen woodland 49248 2.86 G3 Coniferous woodland 695907 40.35 Woodland G Woodland, forest and other G4 Mixed woodland 291687 16.91 and forest wooded land G5 Lines of trees, small woodlands, recently felled woodlands, early stage woodland, 199784 11.58 coppice F1 Tundra 0 0.00 Heathland F Heathland , scrub and F2 Arctic, alpine and subalpine scrub 34524 14.88 and shrub tundra F3 Temperate and mediteraneo-montane scrub 52824 22.76 F4 Temperate shrub heathland 691 0.30 (Source: EEA) Eurostat

Existing potential input layers - MAES activities (ecosystem services) 24 November 2015 (Source: JRC) Eurostat

From maps to accounting tables… (…from accounting tables to better policies) Eurostat