Motivations, principles and development of a pan-european approach to describe MPA network coherence in Europe s seas

Transcription

1 Motivations, principles and development of a pan-european approach to describe MPA network coherence in Europe s seas G. Mo 1, S. Agnesi 1, J. Reker 2 1 ISPRA (Rome, Italy) & European Topic Center on Inland and Coastal Marine Waters (ETC /ICM) 2 EEA (Copenhagen, Denmark)

2 Marine protected areas an EEA thematic assessment European Topic Center for Inland, Coastal and Marine waters (ETC/ICM) European Environment Agency (EEA) European Commission ETC/ICM working group on Marine Protected Areas: EEA Johnny Reker ISPRA Sabrina Agnesi, Aldo Annunziatellis, Giulia Mo, Leonardo Tunesi TC-Vode Lidija Globevnick, Luka Snoj JNCC: Peter Chaniotis SYKE: Samuli Korpinen Marine protected areas EEA thematic assessment ( ) Spatial analysis of MPA cover in Europe s seas & MPA indicator Policy question: What is the EU progress towards 10% coverage? Support: Commission progress report on marine protected areas (MSFD art. 21) through elaboration of basic spatial statistics

3 Background supporting policy implementation CBD Aichi target 11 By 2020, at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and wellconnected systems of protected areas and other effective areabased conservation measures EU Biodiversity Strategy Action 1: Complete the establishment of the Natura 2000 network and ensure good management 1a) Member States and the Commission will ensure that the phase to establish Natura 2000, including in the marine environment, is largely complete by 2012.

4 Background supporting policy implementation Birds Directive Habitats Directive: A coherent European ecological network of special areas of conservation shall be set up under the title Natura 2000 (art. 3). Habitats Directive Marine Strategy Framework Directive:... shall include spatial protection measures, contributing to coherent and representative networks of MPAs adequately covering the diversity of the constituent ecosystems... (art. 13) Progress report on protected areas (art. 21) Marine Strategy Framework Directive Maritime Spatial Planning Directive: Establishing maritime spatial plans......possible activities and interest may include nature and species conservation sites and protected areas (art. 8) Maritime Spatial Planning Directive

5 Marine protected area assessment framework the starting point Prerogatives of a pan-european MPA assessment framework: maintain an ecological outlook and allow cross-comparison based on datasets available to support an EU-level assessment lie on common grounds with EU policy needs and targets and existing RSC frameworks What are the common RSC criteria framework: REPRESENTATIVITY - minimum % surface coverage of MPAs within a given region, sub-region or distance from the coast and protecting the range of features. REPLICATION of sufficient numbers of features across their biogeographic range and within a given region. CONNECTIVITY - Minimum distances between MPAs as a proxy for connections between sites ADEQUACY - Ensuring sites are large enough (some site vs. network-based considerations) MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY - Appropriately managed to meet the objectives of a given MPA (but considered by some a separate issue to eco-coherence)

6 Marine protected area assessment framework data MPAs : Geographic scope: Nationally Designated Areas (CDDA)

7 Marine protected area assessment framework data Data availability influencing the framework design: Missing pan-european and MPA data (species tabular and spatial, fine scale habitat, tabular data contents and format) Available pan-european data : Emodnet broad scale modelled habitats Pan-European MPA assessment framework describing the overall MPA network capacity to: Represent significant proportions of marine regions, buffer distance belts from the coast, biological (benthic) zones and sea bottom habitats (revised broad habitats) Replicate the protection of all sea bottom habitats throughout the network Guarantee different degrees of connectivity between revised broad habitats contained in MPAs Be sufficiently large to guarantee viability of the protected elements Guarantee management effectiveness

8 Marine protected area assessment framework contents Tier 1 : assessment with univocal assumptions all three MPA networks (Natura 2000, CDDA, RSCs) comparable features across all regional seas univocal targets and thresholds for each assessment trial Representativity Regions, distance belts, biological zones Revised broad habitats 10% 20; 60% Tier 2 : assessment generating multiple scenarios all three MPA networks (Natura 2000, CDDA, RSCs) comparable features across all regional seas more than one target for each criteria assessment trial Replication Protected revised broad habitats Proximity Proximity of infralittoral, circalittoral, bathyal and abyssal revised broad habitats Adequacy MPA size 1; km < >100km 2 Tier 3 : case studies on MPA subsets indicating further methodological improvement Representativity Revised broad habitats in MPAs with benthic habitat objectives: -European N2k -All western Mediterranean MPAs 20; 60% Management & effectiveness N2K age vs. management plan

9 Marine protected area assessment framework Where are we now? + a common framework starting point for all MPAs + representativity assessment based on common agreed targets (Aichi, HD) + assessment scenarios based on multiple targets (RSC) + European baseline information standing on common grounds - data layer gaps that need to be closed (i.e. finer scale habitat maps, species maps) - streamlining of spatial and tabular data requirements for all MPA databases: (i.e. database structuring, spatial reporting requirements, synchronisation of reporting, information on conservation objectives and biological features of MPAs, management infrastructure and measures, management efficiency etc.) - further refinement, through policy based fora, of regional targets for replication, proximity and adequacy criteria for different features

10 Thank you! Contacts: / / johnny.reker@eea.europa.eu