Matches and mismatches between national and EU-wide priorities: Examining the Natura 2000 network in vertebrate species conservation

Biological Conservation

Volumn 198, Issue , 2016, Pages 193-201

  Kukkala, Aija S ^a   Arponen, Anni ^a   Maiorano, Luigi ^b   Moilanen, Atte ^a   Thuiller, Wilfried ^c,d   Toivonen, Tuuli ^a   Zupan, Laure ^c   Brotons, Lluís ^e,f,g   Cabeza, Mar ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^c UNIV GRENOBLE ALPES   (France)

^d CNRS   (France)

^e CENTRE TECNOLÒGIC FORESTAL DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^f CREAF   (Spain)

^g CSIC   (Spain)

Author keywords

Birds directive; Habitats directive; Representativeness; Spatial prioritization; Systematic conservation planning; Zonation software

Indexed keywords

BIRD; CONSERVATION PLANNING; DECISION MAKING; ECOLOGICAL ZONATION; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EUROPEAN UNION; HABITAT CONSERVATION; PRIORITIZATION; PROTECTED AREA; SOFTWARE; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

AVES; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 84964408722     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.04.016     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abellan M.D., Martinez J.E., Palazon J.A., Esteve M.A., Calvo J.F. Efficiency of a protected-area network in a Mediterranean region: a multispecies assessment with raptors. Environ. Manag. 2011, 47:983-991.
2. Albuquerque F.S., Assuncao-Albuquerque M.J.T., Cayuela L., Zamora R., Benito B.M. European bird distribution is "well" represented by special protected areas: mission accomplished?. Biol. Conserv. 2013, 159:45-50.
3. Apostolopoulou E., Pantis J.D. Conceptual gaps in the national strategy for the implementation of the European Natura 2000 conservation policy in Greece. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142:221-237.
4. Araujo M.B., Lobo J.M., Moreno J.C. The effectiveness of Iberian protected areas in conserving terrestrial biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21:1423-1432.
5. Bagella S., Caria M.C., Filigheddu R. Gap analysis revealed a low efficiency of Natura 2000 network for the conservation of endemic species in Mediterranean temporary freshwater habitats. Plant Biosyst. 2013, 147:1092-1094.
6. Baquero R.A., Telleria J.L. Species richness, rarity and endemicity of European mammals: a biogeographical approach. Biodivers. Conserv. 2001, 10:29-44.
7. Bladt J., Strange N., Abildtrup J., Svenning J.-C., Skov F. Conservation efficiency of geopolitical coordination in the EU. J. Nat. Conserv. 2009, 17:72-86.
8. CBD Convention on biological diversity. 2016, (Accessed 10 February 2016). https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/rationale/target-11/.
9. Chiarucci A., Bacaro G., Rocchini D. Quantifying plant species diversity in a Natura 2000 network: old ideas and new proposals. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:2608-2618.
10. Culmsee H., Schmidt M., Schmiedel I., Schacherer A., Meyer P., Leuschner C. Predicting the distribution of forest habitat types using indicator species to facilitate systematic conservation planning. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 37:131-144.
11. Dallimer M., Jacobsen J.B., Lundhede T.H., Takkis K., Giergiczny M., Thorsen B.J. Patriotic values for public goods: transnational trade-offs for biodiversity and ecosystem services?. Bioscience 2014, 65:33-42. 10.1093/biosci/biu187.
12. D'Amen M., Bombi P., Campanaro A., Zapponi L., Bologna M.A., Mason F. Protected areas and insect conservation: questioning the effectiveness of Natura 2000 network for saproxylic beetles in Italy. Anim. Conserv. 2013, 16:370-378.
13. Dimitrakopoulos P.G., Memtsas D., Troumbis A.Y. Questioning the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 special areas of conservation strategy: the case of Crete. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2004, 13:199-207.
14. EEA Protected areas in Europe - an overview. EEA Report No 5/2012 2012, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, (2012. Available from http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/protected-areas-in-europe-2012/ Accessed 22 August 2014).
15. EEA Biogeographical Regions 2014, European Environment Agency, (Available from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/biogeographical-regions-europe-1/ Accessed 23 May 2014).
16. EEA Natura 2000 data - the European network of protected sites. Natura 2000 End 2013 rev1 - Shapefile 2014, European Environment Agency, (Available from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-5/ Accessed 8 August 2014).
17. EIONET Codelists for Annex II and IV species Available from, (Accessed 4 June 2014). http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Natura_2000/reference:portal/.
18. EIONET Codelists for birds directive species Available from, (Accessed 4 June 2014). http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Natura_2000/reference:portal/.
19. European Commission Birds directive Available from, (Accessed 8 August 2014). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/birdsdirective/index_en.htm/.
20. European Commission Habitats directive Available from, (Accessed 8 August 2014). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/species/habitats_dir_en.htm/.
21. European Commission Nature and biodiversity newsletter 2015, 37. Natura 2000, (January 2015. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs/docs/nat2000newsl/nat37_en.pdf/ Accessed 20 May 2015).
22. Evans D. Building the European Union's Natura 2000 network. Nat. Conserv. 2012, 1. 10.3897/natureconservation.1.1808.
23. Gaston K.J., Jackson S.E., Nagy A., Cantu-Salazar L., Johnson M. Protected areas in Europe - principle and practice. Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology 2008 2008, 1134:97-119.
24. Grodzinska-Jurczak M., Cent J. Expansion of nature conservation areas: problems with Natura 2000 implementation in Poland?. Environ. Manag. 2011, 47:11-27.
25. Gruber B., Evans D., Henle K., Bauch B., Schmeller D.S., Dziock F., Henry P.-Y., Lengyel S., Margules C., Dormann C.F. "Mind the gap!" - how well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?. Nat. Conserv. 2012, 3:45-62.
26. Hochkirch A., Schmitt T., Beninde J., et al. Europe needs a new vision for a Natura 2020 network. Conserv. Lett. 2013, 6:462-467.
27. IUCN The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3 2014, Available from www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed 20 February 2015).
28. Jantke K., Schleupner C., Schneider U.A. Gap analysis of European wetland species: priority regions for expanding the Natura 2000 network. Biodivers. Conserv. 2011, 20:581-605.
29. Kark S., Tulloch A., Gordon A., Mazor T., Bunnefeld N., Levin N. Cross-boundary collaboration: key to the conservation puzzle. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015, 12:12-24.
30. Kati V., Hovardas T., Dieterich M., Ibisch P.L., Mihok B., Selva N. The challenge of implementing the European network of protected areas Natura 2000. Conserv. Biol. 2015, 29:260-270.
31. Lehtomäki J., Tomppo E., Kuokkanen P., Hanski I., Moilanen A. Applying spatial conservation prioritization software and high-resolution GIS data to a national-scale study in forest conservation. For. Ecol. Manag. 2009, 258:2439-2449.
32. Lison F., Sanchez-Fernandez D., Calvo J.F. Are species listed in the Annex II of the habitats directive better represented in Natura 2000 network than the remaining species? A test using Spanish bats. Biodivers. Conserv. 2015, 24:2459-2473.
33. Maiorano L., Falcucci A., Garton E.O., Boitani L. Contribution of the Natura 2000 network to biodiversity conservation in Italy. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21:1433-1444.
34. Maiorano L., Amori G., Capula M., et al. Threats from climate change to terrestrial vertebrate hotspots in Europe. PLoS One 2013, 8.
35. Maiorano L., Amori G., Montemaggiori A., Rondinini C., Santini L., Saura S., Boitani L. On how much biodiversity is covered in Europe by national protected areas and by the Natura 2000 network: insights from terrestrial vertebrates. Conserv. Biol. 2015, 10.1111/cobi.12535.
36. Margules C.R., Pressey R.L. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 2000, 405:243-253.
37. Mazor T., Possingham H.P., Kark S. Collaboration among countries in marine conservation can achieve substantial efficiencies. Divers. Distrib. 2013, 19:1380-1393.
38. Mikkonen N., Moilanen A. Identification of top priority areas and management landscapes from a national Natura 2000 network. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2013, 27:11-20.
39. Moilanen A., Arponen A. Administrative regions in conservation: balancing local priorities with regional to global preferences in spatial planning. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144:1719-1725.
40. Moilanen A., Anderson B.J., Arponen A., Pouzols F.M., Thomas C.D. Edge artefacts and lost performance in national versus continental conservation priority areas. Divers. Distrib. 2013, 19:171-183.
41. Moilanen A., Pouzols F.M., Meller L., Veach V., Arponen A., Leppänen J., Kujala H. Spatial conservation planning methods and software zonation. User Manual. Version 4 2014, (288 pp. Available from http://cbig.it.helsinki.fi/files/zonation/zonation_manual_v4_0.pdf/ Accessed 6 June 2014).
42. Popescu V.D., Rozylowicz L., Niculae I.M., Cucu A.L., Hartel T. Species, habitats, society: an evaluation of research supporting EU's Natura 2000 network. PLoS One 2014, 9.
43. Pouzols F.M., Toivonen T., Di Minin E., et al. Global protected area expansion is compromised by projected land-use and parochialism. Nature 2014, 516:383-386.
44. Pullin A.S., Baldi A., Can O.E., et al. Conservation focus on Europe: major conservation policy issues that need to Be informed by conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 23:818-824.
45. Thuiller W., Maiorano L., Mazel F., et al. Conserving the functional and phylogenetic trees of life of European tetrapods. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2015, 370. 10.1098/rstb.2014.0005.
46. Trochet A., Schmeller D.S. Effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network to cover threatened species. Nat. Conserv. 2013, 4:35-53.
47. Verovnik R., Govedic M., Salamun A. Is the Natura 2000 network sufficient for conservation of butterfly diversity? A case study in Slovenia. J. Insect Conserv. 2011, 15:345-350.
48. Wamelink G.W.W., de Knegt B., Pouwels R., et al. Considerable environmental bottlenecks for species listed in the habitats and birds directives in the Netherlands. Biol. Conserv. 2013, 165:43-53.