2015 Eionet Biodiversity, Ecosystems, Indicators and Assessments NRC Workshop

2015 Eionet Biodiversity, Ecosystems, Indicators and Assessments NRC workshop Background Note Implementation of Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy: Status and progress of MAES (Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services). 1. Background

In May 2011, the European Commission and Council adopted the ‘Communication for the Implementation of the Biodiversity Strategy to 2020’ (EC, 2011), which also implies the time lines to meet the Aichi targets of the Convention of Biodiversity (EC, 2014a). The headline target for 2020 is ‘halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss’. The Strategy translates this central objective into six specific targets, with 20 concrete actions to achieve them. The Common Implementation Framework (CIF) provides an overview of how these targets and actions are interlinked (see Fig. 1 below). For the implementation of Target 2 Action 5 the Working Group MAES (Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services) – a joint body of the European Commission and Member States with EEA participation was established in 2012. Action 5 states that ‘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.’ Figure 1 Common Implementation Framework (CIF) of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020

Note: Since January 2014 Action 6a) and 6b) are merged and implemented as a joint working group on Green Infrastructure and Restoration. Source: Maes et al., 2013 The background documents of the Mid Term Review of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 20201 conclude that ‘as compared with the EU 2010 biodiversity baseline, biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU have continued’. This is also widely confirmed by the outcomes of the state of the nature report2. For Target 2 it states, that ‘progress has been made on policy and knowledge improvement actions under this target,

1 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/index_en.htm

2 http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state-of-nature-in-the-eu and some restoration activities have taken place in Member States. However, this has not yet halted the trend of degradation of ecosystems and services. National and regional frameworks to promote restoration and green infrastructure need to be developed and implemented. A lot remains to be done to halt the loss of ordinary biodiversity outside the Natura 2000 network.’ Finally Part 2 of the staff working paper identifies the role of MAES: ‘For improving information, strengthening the knowledge base and promoting innovation the MAES initiative is providing the knowledge base for further analyses at EU and Member State's level’.

2. MAES work flows and achievements

The MAES initiative encompasses different work flows:  The MAES Working Group activities (typologies and pilot studies): the Working Group prepared typologies of ecosystems and ecosystem services for which assessments are expected. It also developed a common assessment framework (Maes et al. 2013)3. The typologies and framework are tested in different, thematic or cross-cutting pilots (agriculture, forest, freshwater, marine, urban, soil, nature data, natural capital accounting);  The supporting MESEU and TRAIN projects were initiated by DG-ENV, which gave direct support on mapping and assessment4. EEA Grants funded by Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein provide significant support for the implementation of MAES related assessments mainly in Central and Eastern Europe;  ESMERALDA an Horizon 2020 research project has been launched in March 2015 with the single aim to support Member States in mapping and assessment of ecosystem services5;  EU services (EEA and JRC) have provided material at EU level to support mapping and assessment (including the ecosystem map, ecosystem services maps and guidance)6;  MAES is the EU input to the regional ecosystem assessment that will be carried out in the framework of IPBES;

3 Maes et al. 2013: MAES analytical framework: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/ecosystem_assessment/pdf/MAESWorkingPaper2013.pdf

4 Reports work in progress. Will be made available until December 2015 on http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/ecosystem_assessment/index_en.htm

ESMERALDA Project: http://www.esmeralda-project.eu/

Maes et al. 2014: Indicators for ecosystem assessment under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/ecosystem_assessment/pdf/2ndMAESWorkingPaper.pdf JRC Science and Policy Report 2015: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC94889/lbna27143enn.pdf EEA Technical Report 06/2015: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-ecosystem-assessment  DG-ENV, EEA and JRC work together to provide a platform for delivery of data (through the Biodiversity Information System for Europe BISE7 and the JRC supported ESP-visualisation tool8) By the end of 2014, most Member States have started MAES related assessments but the progress made differs per country. A first overview about current state is available on the BISE platform especially in the MAES digital atlas9 and even more in the MAES catalogue of case studies10. Information about Member State activities was also summarized by the MESEU project and the final report of this project will become available before end of this year. DG-ENV and INBO (Belgium) will organize a MAES delivery workshop 15.-16. December 2015 in Brussels to demonstrate the achievements of MAES so far and in view of the Mid Term Review process of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020.

3. Data, concept and implementation for ecosystem – ecosystem service assessment

Ecosystem and ecosystem service assessment requires integration of a wide variety of data and information. The MAES Working Group developed a four step approach to map and assess ecosystems and their services (see Fig. 2). At European level this approach is currently implemented in cooperation between EEA (ecosystem mapping and condition assessment) and JRC (ecosystem service mapping and assessment). The fourth step foresees the integration of both activities to assess how ecosystem condition affects the provision of services. Figure 2 Four step approach to map and assess ecosystems and their services

Ecosystem Assessment: http://biodiversity.europa.eu/maes

The Ecosystem Services Partnership: http://www.es-partnership.org/esp

MAES digital atlas: http://biodiversity.europa.eu/maes/maes-digital-atlas 10

MAES catalogue of case studies: http://biodiversity.europa.eu/maes/maes-catalogue-of-case-studies Source: Maes et al., 2014. The EEA Technical Report 06/2015 ‘European Ecosystem Assessment – Concept, Data, and Implementation’11 supported by a series of working documents drafted by ETC/SIA, ETC/ULS and ETC/BD12 outlines the current approach for the first 2 steps of the approach (see Fig. 2), using the DPSIR concept as overall framework (see Fig. 3). The documents also include an overview about data availability for ecosystem mapping and assessment on European level. The key elements of the concept comprise: 1. Mapping of ecosystem distribution by reclassifying CORINE Land Cover classes using the MAES ecosystem typology (Maes et al., 2013) and further refine the ecosystem types by delineating EUNIS habitat information. The refinement process uses reference data such as potential natural vegetation, elevation, slope, aspect, soil, geology, environmental regions and other spatial referenced information which allows to attribute the EUNIS habitat characteristics to the spatial mapping units of the MAES ecosystem type map; 2. Mapping the main pressures affecting ecosystem condition, mainly habitat change, climate change, alien invasive species, land use and management, and nutrient and pollution load; 3. Mapping ecosystem state / condition either indirectly by using pressures as indicator, or directly by use of condition information such as Art. 12 data of the Birds Directive, Art. 17 data of the Habitats Directive or ecological status of the Water Framework Directive; 4. Interpret the condition data in terms of change in ecosystem function and biodiversity and relate this information to the Targets of the Biodiversity Strategy (e.g. 15% restoration of degraded ecosystems, no net loss). Figure 3 Use of DPSIR framework for ecosystem assessment

EEA Technical Report 06/2015: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-ecosystem-assessment

http://projects.eionet.europa.eu/eea-ecosystem-assessments/library Drivers agriculture, forestry, water management, settlement, transport, industry, tourism, etc

Response maintaining ecosystem Pressures functioning and biodiversity, habitat change, climate management change, change, invasive species, prevention measures, land use / exploitation, protection, nutrient & nutrient & pollution load pollution reduction

State / Condition Impacts ecosystem state and quality change/loss of ecosystem / structure and functioning function, nutrient condition, habitat change/loss of biodiversity diversity, species abundance and diversity

Source: EEA Technical Report 06/2015. The results of the mapping and assessment activities are currently outlined in a second EEA Technical Report, entitled ‘Mapping and assessing the condition of Europe’s ecosystems: Progress and challenges’ which will be published end of November 2015. State or condition in the DPSIR framework describes the capacity of ecosystems to provide services. To assess the effect of ecosystem condition on service delivery was object of a joint JRC – EEA workshop in July 2015 based on the concept as illustrated in Figure 4. The approach implies the spatially explicit comparison of indicators which measure ecosystem condition and indicators which measure potential delivery of ecosystem services and aggregation of the outcomes which for example can be used as input for the Restoration and Prioritization Framework (Action 6a in Fig. 1) of the Common Implementation Framework of the Biodiversity Strategy. Figure 4 Linking ecosystem condition and ecosystem services

Source: JRC, 2015, work in progress The first analyses of the outcomes demonstrated, that there is urgent need for further elaboration and implementation of the causal relationships between ecosystem condition and ecosystem services in the mapping and assessment approach, which will be one of the priorities in the 2016 work plans of EEA, ETC/ULS and ETC/BD.

4. The way forward

MAES Working Group and related activities will continue over the coming years proceeding with the mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services. EEA and ETC work plans foresee an update of the current ecosystem map, improvement of the knowledge base for ecosystem condition mapping and better understanding of how ecosystem condition is linked to biodiversity and how it affects the capacity to deliver ecosystem services. It implies the integration of upcoming information mainly the data from Copernicus land services and environmental reporting cycles (State of Nature, WFD etc.), use of outcomes of research projects mainly OPERAs, OPENness and ESMERALDA, and the development of concepts for integrated assessments across land, freshwater and marine ecosystems. Additionally there will be more and more focus on the upcoming targets of Action 5, the development and implementation of concepts for assessing the value of ecosystem services, and the integration of these values into accounting as outlined in the Action 5 of the CIF (please see above). This offers the opportunity to discuss how EIONET, especially the Biodiversity Ecosystems, Indicators and Assessments NRC see its role in this process. This could imply:  The overall level of involvement and linking to the MAES process;  The link to other data and information flows which contribute to the assessments, especially WFD, MSFD, Nature Directive reporting, Copernicus services etc., and the need for cross-NRCs coordination and cooperation;  The use of additional data, information and methods for ecosystem mapping and assessment including scaling issues and improvements of the overall approach;  The involvement of non-EU Member States and cooperating countries in this process;  The overarching role of IPBES in the cooperation.

EEA contact: Markus Erhard, NSS5, [email protected]