la influencia de las metas de aichi en la priorización de la ... · la influencia de las metas de...
TRANSCRIPT
La influencia de las metas de Aichi en la priorización de la restauración
de ecosistemas en Europa
J. Cortina ([email protected])
EU BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY 2020
TARGET 1 Fully implement the Birds and Habitats Directives
TARGET 2 Maintain and restore ecosystems and their services
TARGET 3 Increase the contribution of agriculture and forestry to biodiversity
TARGET 4 Ensure the sustainable use of fisheries resources
TARGET 5 Combat Invasive alien Species
TARGET 6 Step-up action to tackle the global biodiversity crisis
EUR
OP
E
TARGET 2. MAINTAIN AND RESTORE ECOSYSTEMS AND THEIR SERVICES Ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by: • Green infrastructure by end 2012
• Restoring at least 15% of degraded ecosystems. By 2014:
each member state has developed a strategic framework to set priorities for ecosystem restoration!
• By 2015: no net loss of ecosystems and their services ‘biodiversity proof’ policy at all levels
EUR
OP
E
ACTION 6a: "By 2014, Member States, with the assistance of the Commission, will develop a strategic framework to set priorities for ecosystem restoration at sub-national, national and EU level".
EUR
OP
E
• What is degraded?
• What is restored?
• Descriptors/threshold values?
• Multiple target ecosystems?
• Why past restoration efforts do not account? (baseline 2010)
• Why transformation within a given level do not account?
• Must prioritization be done at national or European level?
• Does the 15% target apply at a European or national level?
• How will be funded?
• Why not adopting a true landscape aproach?
• Why only Forests, Grasslands, Croplands, Wetlands, Urban?
STILL TOO MANY QUESTIONS EU
RO
PE
1 M$
in stream restoration/road decommissioning
12 to 28 jobs
Moseley and Nielson-Pincus (2009). Ecosystem Workforce Program Briefing Paper #14; winter 2009; Institute for Sustainable Development, Eugene, OR
EUR
OP
E
INNOVATIVE FINANCING INSTRUMENTS
• Potential of private non-profit sources to fund actions under Target 2
• Philanthropic donations by companies from private for-profit sources to fund actions under Target 2
• Public private partnerships and bonds for green infrastructure
• Insurance sector mitigating of environmental risk
• Payments for ecosystem services (PES)
• Tax Relief on capital assets in good environmental management
• Hypothecated tax funds
• Risk-sharing investment structures (first-loss loans, subordinated debt, etc.)
• Pro-biodiversity business (PBB) models - investment funds & funding platforms
• Product labelling and certification
• Bio-Carbon markets
• Biodiversity Offsets and Habitat Banking
EUR
OP
E
Decision making group
Forest expert subgroup
Peatland expert subgroup
Cultural habitats expert
subgroup
Coastal areas, tundra, rocky
outcrops
ECOLOGICALLY VALID IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
AICHI 15% ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION TARGET
Janne S. Kotiaho President of the Finnish Restoration Prioritization Working Group, Ministry of Environment, Finland Professor of Ecology, University of Jyväskylä, Finland Founder and Board of Directors, Peerage of Science @JanneKotiaho
FIN
LAN
D
Landscape area %
Eco
syste
m c
on
dit
ion
0
1
A
C
D
B
Options for restoration
0 100
Kotiaho et al. 2015: Target for ecosystem repair is impractical - Nature 519: 33.
Current condition
15% reduction in
degree of degradation
due to restoration
Current degree
of degradation
FIN
LAN
D
Computational prioritization among ecosystem types
Cost efficiency of restoration measures
Restoration measure portfolio within each ecosystem
Final expert, official and stake holder negotiated prioritization
Hydrological effects
Other ecosystem services
Carbon storage Quantify current ecosystem condition
Quantify the effect of restoration measures on
ecosystem condition
Quantify the costs of restoration
measures
Overall picture of the prioritization of restoration FI
NLA
ND
• Threatened and nearly threatened species, national
• Species in bad or unfavourable status, EU directives
• Threatened and nearly threatened habitats, national
• Habitats in bad and unfavourable status, EU directives
- Species and habitats have different weights
- Threatened habitats > directives habitats > threatened species > directive species
• Habitat area
• Degree of degradation in the habitat
- More degraded habitas have higher weight (greater extinction debt)
• Cost efficiency in ecosystem condition improvement
Components for across ecosystem prioritization
FIN
LAN
D
OBJETIVOS PLAN GENERAL REPOBLACIÓN FORESTAL (1939-1986)
Producción de madera
Control hidrológico, protección del suelo
Forraje
Tierra disponible
Empleo
Lucha contra el maquis
(Pemán et al. 2010; Sierra-Vigil, 2010)
1927
DGB-INIA
1994
ESPA
ÑA
WWF (2009). Bosques españoles. Los bosques que nos quedan y propuestas de WWF para su restauración. www.wwf.es/bosques
15% TARGET = 4.6 ·106 Ha
ESPA
ÑA
Criterio 1: zonas que contribuyen a la reducción de la combustibilidad en zonas de alta peligrosidad de incendios forestales, zonas con prioridad de actuación por necesidad de control del muérdago y zonas con prioridad alta por su contribución a la regulación climática y mitigación de la desertificación (93.749 ha). Criterio 2: zonas que contribuyen a tres o más servicios ambientales de los contemplados en el programa selvícola y zonas que contribuyen a dos servicios y ambos son prioritarios (13.592 ha). Criterio 3: zonas que contribuyen a la prestación de dos servicios y al menos uno de ellos es prioritario (97.928 ha).
CO
MU
NID
AD
VA
LEN
CIA
NA
PATFOR
Area 163 km2
Climate Semi-arid
Mediterranean
Rainfall 326 mm
Temperature 18°C
Demographic
density
88 inhabitants/km2
Household
size
6,6
inhabitants/household
STUDY AREA M
AR
RU
ECO
S
MA
RR
UEC
OS
Definition of the data matrix
•Criteria: Ecosystem services
•Alternatives: Landscape units
Data collection
•Sampling
•Data bases exploration
Multicriteria Analysis
• Standardization
• Weighting
• Integrated evaluation
• Sensibility analysis
Pilot project
Participative ecological restoration
Tools for planning ecological restoration in the Region of Valencia (TERECOVA)
Global Change
Cost-benefit analysis
Landscape integration, Biodiversity
Participation
Innovation Planning
Evaluation-certification
DRYLAND RESTORATION
INTEGRATING PEOPLE VALUES AND ASPIRATIONS C
OM
UN
IDA
D V
ALE
NC
IAN
A
Ownership
Protection status
Flood risk
Connectivity...
GIS AREA STAKEHOLDER
PLATFORM
CRITERIA IDENTIFIED
WEIGHED CRITERIA
GIS CRITERIA
PRIORITY MAP
IDENTIFICATION-WEIGHT ES
SOCIO-ECO SCENARIOS
RESTORATION SCENARIOS
POTENTIAL ES COST-BENEFIT
ANALYSIS
VALUATION, TRANSFER, DIFFUSION
INTEGRATING PEOPLE VALUES AND ASPIRATIONS C
OM
UN
IDA
D V
ALE
NC
IAN
A
PAR
TIC
IPA
CIÓ
N
INTEGRATING PEOPLE VALUES AND ASPIRATIONS
Preferencias de los grupos de interés del valle de Béni Boufrah (Rif, Marruecos)
Research funded by projects : UNCROACH – Dynamics of woody vegetation in dry and semiarid landscapes under global change. Implications for the provision of ecosystem services (CGL2011-30581-C02-01). TERECOVA – Tools for integrating ecological restoration into land planning in the Region of Valencia (CGL2014-52714-C2-1-R)
SEMER – Optimización de la Provisión de Bienes y Servicios en Paisajes Forestales Degradados de Marruecos Mediante la Restauración Ecológica (AECI AP/040315/11))