Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits Associated with the Natura 2000 Network
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network Page left blank intentionally Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network Output of the EC project PREPARATORY ACTIONS FOR NATURA 2000 Lot 1: The Economic and Social Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network Contract No.: ENV.B.2/SER/2008/0038 Revised final version: 06 October 2010 First final version: 13 August 2010 Sonja Gantioler, Samuela Bassi, Marianne Kettunen, Andrew McConville, Patrick ten Brink (IEEP) Matt Rayment (GHK) Ruta Landgrebe, Holger Gerdes (Ecologic) Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) 15 Queen Anne’s Gate Quai au Foin, 55 London, SWIH 9BU 1000 Brussels United Kingdom Belgium In cooperation with 67 Clerkenwell Road, London EC1R 5BL, United Kingdom Ecologic Institute Pfalzburger Strasse 43/44 10717 Berlin Germany Recommended citation: Gantioler S., Rayment M., Bassi S., Kettunen M., McConville A., Landgrebe R., Gerdes H., ten Brink P. Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network. Final report to the European Commission, DG Environment on Contract ENV.B.2/SER/2008/0038. Institute for European Environmental Policy / GHK / Ecologic, Brussels 2010 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper draws on the expertise and contributions of a number of people. We would like to thank the following: Ctibor Kocman (EC), Micheal O’Briain (EC), Katie McCoy (IEEP), Henry Eden Jones (IEEP), Andra Ioana Milcu (IEEP), Odette Carter (IEEP), Marcelline Bon- neau (GHK), Steph Charalambous (GHK), Gabriel Pierard (GHK), Madeleine Vazquez (GHK), Colette deRoo (Ecologic), Sophie Herbert (Ecologic), Ana Frelih-Larsen (Ecologic), Sandra Naumann (Ecologic) We would also like to thank all the ministry representatives who engaged in this process and offered their time and insights from across the Member States of the EU, as well as all the stakeholder representatives and other experts for their contributions. The contents and views contained in this report are those of the authors, and do not necessarily represent those of the European Commission. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................1 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 2 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURA 2000 ....................................................6 2.1 Updating/refining cost estimates: the cost questionnaire ..............................7 2.1.1 The cost typology used ................................................................................7 2.1.2 Methodology used by the team ....................................................................9 2.1.3 Overview of Member States cost estimates ...............................................11 2.1.4 Discussion of cost estimates ......................................................................14 2.1.5 Comparison of different cost estimates across Member States..................17 2.1.6 Estimated costs for EU-27 .........................................................................25 2.1.7 Comparison of costs across land use types ................................................26 2.1.8 Comparison with other cost estimates .......................................................28 2.1.9 Trends and expected future costs ...............................................................30 2.1.10 Funding and cost coverage .........................................................................31 2.2 Methodology to update information on costs ...............................................35 2.2.1 The difficulty to pin down costs specific to Natura 2000 ..........................35 2.2.2 The assessment of specific cost typologies ................................................38 2.2.3 Categorisation - land use versus habitat types ...........................................41 2.2.4 Assumptions and challenges to assess future costs ....................................42 2.2.5 Insights on costs grossing up and scaling up .............................................44 2.2.6 Key drivers of costs and implications for future updates ..........................45 2.2.7 Data collection and gaps ............................................................................47 2.2.8 Lessons learned from other cost methodologies ........................................47 2.2.9 Summary of lessons learned and recommendations by Member States on improving cost data collection ..................................................................................53 3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURA 2000 .....56 3.1 Synthesising existing information on Natura 2000 benefits ........................57 3.1.1 Overall assessment .....................................................................................57 3.1.2 Summary of the existing quantitative and monetary assessments .............59 3.1.3 Level of stakeholder appreciation and awareness in Member States ........66 3.2 Developing a common methodology for Natura 2000 ..................................68 3.2.1 Classifying ecosystem services and socio-economic benefits ...................69 3.2.2 Defining a standard valuation framework for assessing benefits ..............77 3.2.3 Define policy scenarios and baselines .......................................................87 3.2.4 Grossing and scaling up from site ..............................................................89 3.2.5 Identifying beneficiaries ............................................................................93 4 COMPARING COSTS AND BENEFITS ...........................................................95 4.1 Seeing costs and benefits in perspective ........................................................95 4.2 Way forward on comparing costs and benefits ............................................97 5 HOW TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF THE NET BENEFITS OF NATURA 2000 .....................................................................................................100 5.1 Current awareness of the benefits of the network in the EU ....................100 5.1.1 Current awareness in the general public and policy makers ....................100 5.1.2 Factors influencing public opinion towards Natura 2000 ........................101 5.2 Initiatives and approaches taken to promote awareness of the network .103 5.2.1 Government initiatives to improve awareness of Natura 2000 benefits ..103 5.2.2 NGO initiatives to increase awareness of benefits ..................................105 5.3 Key factors for successful communication to promote the socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000 ............................................................................................106 5.3.1 Early engagement and involvement into the project ................................106 5.3.2 Consistent and appropriate implementation .............................................107 5.3.3 Prompt and appropriate payments ...........................................................107 5.3.4 Communicating the link between conservation measures and related socio- economic benefits ...................................................................................................107 5.3.5 Delivering local successes .......................................................................108 5.3.6 Supporting education programmes and developing skills .......................109 5.3.7 Appropriate scale for communication ......................................................109 5.3.8 Engaging other government departments ................................................110 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................111 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................119 ANNEX I .................................................................................................................. - 1 - ANNEX II ................................................................................................................. - 2 - ANNEX III ............................................................................................................. - 19 - ABBREVIATIONS CAP EU Common Agricultural Policy CORINE Coordination of Information on the Environment DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (UK) EAFRD European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development EC European Commission EEA European Environment Agency ESS Ecosystem Services ETS Emission Trading Scheme EU European Union FCS Favourable Conservation Status FTE Full-time Equivalent GDP Gross Domestic Product GIS Geographical Information System GNP Gross National Product LIFE European Environment Fund MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment MS Member State NPV Net present value PES Payments for Environmental Services PPP Purchasing Power Parity SAC Special Area of Conservation SCI Site of Community Importance SPA Special Protection Area SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest (UK) TEV Total Economic Value TSV Total System Value WTA Willingness to Accept WTP Willingness to Pay Page left blank intentionally EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Key Messages Financial resources required to implement Natura 2000 • Building on the results of the Member States questionnaire, the annual costs of im- plementing the Natura 2000 network were estimated as €5.8 billion per year for the EU-27 . • This value should be seen as an underestimate as most countries focused on historic and/or budgeted expenditures (e.g. Belgium), and fewer provided