Changing climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe

Transcription

Changing climate,
changing biodiversity in
South-East Europe
Proceedings of the conference
Belgrade, 18-19 June 2008
Proceedings of the conference:
Changing climate, changing biodiversity
in South-East Europe
Belgrade, 18-19 June 2008
Authors
Nieto, A., H. Wijnja and L. Jones-Walters (Eds)
ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation
Tilburg, the Netherlands, 2008
Prepared by:
ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation, in cooperation with RECRegional Environmental Center
Copyright:
© 2008 ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of ECNC.
Citation:
Nieto, A., H. Wijnja and L. Jones-Walters (Eds), (2008) Proceedings of the
Conference: Changing climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe;
Belgrade, 18-19 June 2008. ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation,
Tilburg, the Netherlands
Available from:
PO Box 90154
5000 LG Tilburg
The Netherlands
Email: [email protected]
http://www.ecnc.org
ISBN:
978-90-76762-24-1
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this report do not necessarily constitute ECNC policy, and
do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Spanish International
Cooperation Agency for Development.
Funded by:
AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo
(Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development)
Photos:
Proceedings of the Conference: Changing climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe
Table of contents
Preface .................................................................................................................................. 4
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5
2 Setting the scene..................................................................................................................
Welcome on behalf of the European Centre for Nature Conservation ....................................
Welcome on behalf of the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe .......
Welcome on behalf of the Spanish Embassy in Belgrade .....................................................
Welcome on behalf of AECID-Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development .......
Biodiversity and climate change policy responses for South-East Europe ...............................
7
7
8
8
9
10
3 International, European and regional policy frameworks and actions for addressing climate change
and biodiversity in South-East Europe ........................................................................................ 12
Convention on Biological Diversity and pan-European policy targets and instruments dealing
with climate change impacts on biodiversity ..................................................................... 12
EU policy on climate change impacts on biodiversity .......................................................... 13
4 Regional impacts and response to climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services in SEE ..... 15
Climate change impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe and
South-East Europe........................................................................................................ 15
5 Direct impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and policy response –
examples from the South-East European region ...........................................................................
Albania .......................................................................................................................
Bosnia-Herzegovina ......................................................................................................
Montenegro .................................................................................................................
Serbia.........................................................................................................................
Turkey ........................................................................................................................
6 Managing the effects of climate change and increasing the resilience of ecosystems .......................
Safeguarding natural infrastructure from impacts of climate change.....................................
Adaptation to climate change: the perspective of WWF on the Danube .................................
Ecological networks as an adaptive strategy for climate change adaptation ...........................
Managing climate change impacts on biodiversity in protected areas in pan-Europe, including
Natura 2000 sites .........................................................................................................
Impacts, science and adaptation policy: developing adaptation case studies in four contrasting
areas of England ..........................................................................................................
16
16
17
19
21
21
23
23
24
25
26
27
7 Communication and public awareness on climate change impacts on biodiversity ........................... 29
Public awareness in South-East Europe about climate change impacts on biodiversity............. 29
Improving communication between key stakeholders for addressing the impacts of climate
change on biodiversity...................................................................... ............................. 29
8 Conference conclusions and recommendations .......................................................................... 31
9 Closing remark ..................................................................................................................... 35
Closing remarks on behalf of the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe ....35
Closing remarks on behalf of the European Centre for Nature Conservation........................... 35
Annex 1 Conference programme
Annex 2 Workshops
Annex 3 Participants list
ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation © 2008
3
Preface
The threat posed by climate change to people, livelihoods and our environment is now widely accepted at
both the scientific level and amongst policymakers and, increasingly, politicians and the general public.
Nobody can predict the future; however, all the current data and information and a range of sophisticated
models suggest that ecosystems, the goods and services that they provide, and the biodiversity that is an
integral part of them are becoming increasingly degraded and less able to function. It is also clear that
Southern Europe will be particularly badly affected both generally and specifically in relation to its
biodiversity.
We were therefore particularly pleased to be able to coordinate the delivery of the interregional project
‘Climate change impacts on biodiversity in South-East Europe’, of which this conference was one of the
key outputs.
The project is based on the assumption that the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem
services in South-East Europe will be severe; indeed these effects are already visible in many places and
in many ways. These include increased temperatures, extreme pressure on water resources, a rise in the
frequency of severe weather conditions and flooding, increased coastal erosion and more forest fires.
Although our understanding of the complex processes surrounding climate change impacts is still in its
early stages, these trends and patterns and their impact on biodiversity are confirmed by scientists and
experts in the South-East European region. Whilst there is limited data available in certain parts of the
region, we are also beginning to establish where the gaps exist in research and monitoring and can begin
to target our efforts in these areas better.
This project, funded by AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo
(Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development) and implemented by ECNC and REC, has
already led to an increased understanding and sharing of expertise about the effects of climate change on
biodiversity and ecosystem services. Even better, in terms of added value, it has led to a growing
consensus about the urgency of additional policies and measures. For instance, the interregional
conference which formed part of this project resulted in a plea for a targeted and concrete action plan for
climate change and biodiversity in the region.
The delegates were drawn from the leading experts in the field of biodiversity and climate change in
Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.
These Conference Proceedings are complemented by the Background Report and here are summarized
the presentations, discussions and outcomes of the interregional conference on Climate change impacts
on biodiversity in South-East Europe, which took place on 18 & 19 June 2008 in Belgrade, Serbia.
I am very pleased with the way the project increased the expertise, interregional cooperation and also
the general levels of awareness about the effects of climate change on biodiversity amongst
stakeholders.
As a result of the project I believe that a platform has been created from which actions can be taken that
will allow South-East Europe to be better prepared for maintaining the quality of its rich biodiversity, its
ecosystems and the vital goods and services that they provide.
Rob Wolters
Executive Director ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation
4
1.
Introduction
This report contains the proceedings of the interregional conference ‘Changing climate, changing
biodiversity in South-East Europe’, which took place on 18 and 19 June 2008 in Belgrade, Serbia.
Predictions are that Southern and South-East Europe (SEE) may be severely affected by climate change.
There is a growing body of scientific evidence showing that the effects of climate change on biodiversity
and the ‘goods and services’ that ecosystems provide (ecosystem services) are steadily increasing.
For SEE countries specific impacts may include: increased temperatures; a rise in the frequency of
extreme weather events; increased coastal erosion, sea level rise, rising water levels in tidal rivers;
increased flooding, pressure on water resources; changing agricultural landscapes, crop failure; changes
in habitats and species distribution; increasing problems caused by alien invasive species and a decrease
in the richness of biodiversity.
In addition, there will be more problems for local and regional communities that depend on the services
provided by ecosystems (in the form of food, drinking water, fuel, building materials or as a harvestable
resource) to sustain acceptable living conditions and welfare.
In SEE there is lack of information about the changing climate and its associated impacts and it is
therefore vitally important to increase knowledge and awareness about the impacts of climate change on
biodiversity and ecosystem services.
The research, policy and stakeholder networks dealing with climate change, and those dealing with
biodiversity and ecological networks are presently only rarely interacting in SEE and at European level.
There is much potential for stronger cooperation. This should focus on making more effective policies and
finding means to mitigate for the rapidly advancing and potentially adverse impacts of climate change for the benefit of biodiversity and ecosystem services. There is an important role for the regions in this
process; they can take a strategic overview and need to be aware of these issues, and they have a level
of authority that can assist greatly in driving the response to climate change.
ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation responded to this need by coordinating a project
together with REC-Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe that aimed to assist
and increase the capacity of five countries in SEE in taking the necessary measures to maintain the
quality of their biodiversity and to avoid, where possible, further damage to ecosystem services on which
local communities depend. The countries are: Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and
Turkey. The project was funded by the AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el
Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development) and its duration is 14 months
(September 2007-November 2008).
One of the main outputs of the project is a background report that contains information about: the
impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services; policies and legislation related to
climate change and biodiversity; existing mitigations and adaption strategies; and existing awareness at
both public and political levels – focusing mainly on the five above-mentioned target countries.
Another vital component of the implementation of the project was the interregional conference ‘Changing
climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe’, which took place on 18-19 June 2008 in Belgrade,
Serbia. The conference focused on five SEE countries – Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia
and Turkey – and brought together 60 experts: representatives from NGOs, managers of protected
areas, local authorities and policymakers from the SEE region and also experts from European countries.
The aim of the conference was to further increase the existing knowledge and awareness about the
impacts of climate change on biodiversity, to identify and implement realistic solutions that will help
maintain the quality of the biodiversity in the SEE region and to bring people together to establish
ongoing dialogue and the first steps toward an active network.
The conference consisted of presentations and facilitated workshops addressing climate change and
biodiversity impacts, polices and legislation, mitigation and adaptation strategies as well as issues related
to communication and awareness. Abstracts of the presentations are provided in these proceedings as
well as the results of the workshops.
5
The conference resulted in common understanding and agreement on priority actions. These are reflected
in the Recommendations of the conference.
The outcomes of this conference have also been incorporated in the technical background report: Climate
change and biodiversity in South-East Europe – impacts and action (Laušević, R., Jones-Walters, L., and
A. Nieto, 2008). Both the technical background report and the conference outcomes are concisely
summarised in the document: Climate change and biodiversity in South East Europe: a concise summary
of the scientific and policy context, issues and recommended actions. (Laušević, R., L. Jones-Walters, A.
Nieto and A. Torre-Marin, 2008). This document is also available from ECNC.
6
2
Setting the scene
Welcome on behalf of ECNC-European
Centre for Nature Conservation
By Rob Wolters, Executive Director ECNC-European Centre for
Nature Conservation
It gives me great pleasure to be in Belgrade today and to
welcome you to this conference on behalf of ECNC-European
Centre for Nature Conservation. The conference was organized by
ECNC in collaboration with the Regional Environmental Center for
Central and Eastern Europe, and with the generous support of the
AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el
Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development). Their support is a reflection of
the acknowledgement of the importance of this issue of climate change and its impacts on biodiversity,
particularly in Southern and South-East Europe and I would like to thank my colleagues in ECNC, REC
and our funder AECID for making this conference a reality.
Indeed, during the next two days we hope to explore the issues and challenges that face us with a range
of invited experts from the region and beyond. I believe that this is the first time that an event with this
specific purpose and format has been organized within South-East Europe, and we are therefore
expecting a range of interesting and novel outcomes. We intend to publish these outcomes in the form of
Conference Proceedings. These will be accompanied by a technical background report containing an
overview of the situation in relation to biodiversity and climate change in Europe, with particular
reference to South-East Europe, and including all of the country reports whose authors will be giving
presentations on the current position in their countries later today.
We should not underestimate the scale of the challenge we face in confronting the impacts of climate
change on our economies, society and our environment. Biodiversity has a key role to play. It supports
economic prosperity through the provision of food, building materials, environmental protection and a
wide range of other ecosystem services, including tourism opportunities; it gives us spiritual well-being
and, for example through agriculture, sustains rural and urban communities; finally it is a key component
in the environment around us. Without it the world would not be able to function.
We are already beginning to see the impacts of climate change in many parts of Europe. ECNC has
already been involved in a number of initiatives that have served to illustrate, to me, the urgency in
relation to: policy formulation; the provision of financial support; and the need for concrete action to save
habitats and species under threat. There is no doubt that South-East Europe is likely to be particularly
affected in this respect.
I am looking forward very much to hearing from the speakers and to seeing the outcomes of the various
workshops we have planned as part of the conference. Following the introductory programme which
includes a scene setting presentation from Jelena Cvetkovic, Assistant Minister and Minister’s representative
of the Ministry of Environmental Protection of Serbia, we have structured the conference in order to provide
you with context in the form of presentations from international and country level experts followed, on
both days, by facilitated workshops. In these workshops you can debate issues and solutions to the key
problems of climate change in South-East Europe; each group will then be asked to feed back in the
plenaries. It is also our intention, during the conference, to formulate a set of recommendations arising
from the presentations and discussions that we will have ready for the final plenary session.
The abstracts of all the presentations, the recommendations and the detailed results of the workshops
and of the plenary discussions will be written up and published in the form of proceedings that will be
available (also in PDF format) to the participants, other key stakeholders and interested parties.
It only remains for me to thank you all for coming and I wish you a great two days.
[Note: Annexes 1, 2 and 3 contain the agenda, the outcomes of the workshops and the list of participants
respectively.]
7
Welcome
on
behalf
of
REC-Regional
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern
Europe
By Dr Radoje Laušević, Regional Director for SEE Regional
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Szentendre,
Hungary
I would like to echo the sentiments of my colleague and friend
Rob Wolters and to thank him for his introduction to the subject.
For those of us who live and work in South-East Europe the
impacts of climate change are a very visible and tangible feature
of our daily lives that are hard to avoid. I am therefore extremely pleased to be able to welcome you on
behalf of the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe to a conference that could
not be better timed in terms of its relevance to the policymaking cycle and the need for urgent action to
combat the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and many other aspects of our lives.
It is clear that we are unprepared for the changes in our environment and its wildlife that are likely to
take place over the coming decades. For me, the policy agenda and financial support for action are key
aspects for us to consider doing the conference. We do not have sufficient policy frameworks in order to
respond effectively to climate change, we do not have sufficient levels of expertise among policymakers,
or they do not have sufficient access to relevant expertise and information, and we very quickly need to
learn about the most effective measures that can be taken in terms of concrete action. I have great
hopes that this conference will begin to build a platform upon which new policy can be made and relevant
action can be delivered.
I would also like to thank my colleagues in the REC, ECNC and our funder AECID-Agencia Española de
Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation Agency for
Development) for making this workshop and the associated reports a possibility. Thank you also to the
speakers and delegates. I, too, would like to wish you a successful conference.
Welcome on behalf of the Spanish Embassy
in Belgrade
By Pablo Rupérez Pascualena, Representative of the Embassy of
Spain in Belgrade
On behalf of the Spanish Embassy in Belgrade, it is a great
pleasure for me to welcome you all today to this conference about
Climate change and biodiversity in South-East Europe, organized
by the ECNC and the Regional Environmental Center for Central
and Eastern Europe, with the support of AECID-Agencia Española
de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (Spanish
International Cooperation Agency for Development).
The celebration of this conference today in Belgrade is for us, when we consider it from our perspective
as Spanish Embassy, especially pleasant, for quite a variety of reasons.
First, the subject: climate change. It is hard to find a hotter topic nowadays in Spain. In these days,
climate change has become in our country a matter of permanent debate, and a problem with clear and
direct consequences and negative effects over the everyday life of the population. Thus, climate change
is taking an increasing role in the policies of our institutions.
Second, from the point of view of our relations with Serbia, this conference today shows again the
Spanish will of cooperation with the country in its European integration path, in this case in areas like
environment policies. We have already celebrated some seminars about sustainable development, about
European agriculture, there are some ongoing proposals in the field of renewable energies, the Azahar
8
programme has been putting into place several activities, so somehow this conference today continues
and completes these ongoing efforts.
Finally, I would also like to underline the importance for us of our relations with the Balkan countries, and
our attempt to enhance their own internal dialogue, amongst their countries, institutions and NGOs, in
order for them to share experiences and tackle common problems. This conference would also confirm
our determination in that attempt.
Sharing and exchanging information about the Spanish and the Balkan perspectives about the climate
change question, I am pretty confident that this conference will raise interesting debates, and a fruitful
exchange of ideas and experiences, for all.
Welcome on behalf of AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación
Internacional para el Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation
Agency for Development)
By Cristina Gutiérrez Hernández, General Coordinator of the Technical Office for Cooperation with the Balkans,
AECID-Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation
On behalf of the Spanish International Cooperation Agency for Development, I would like to welcome the
participants to the conference ‘Changing climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe’, organized by ECNCEuropean Centre for Nature Conservation.
I am very grateful to panellists, moderators, and participants from governments, intergovernmental and
non-governmental organizations from Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Turkey, for
being united in the common interest and goal of understanding biodiversity and climate change
interactions in this region.
Climate, biodiversity and human well-being are inextricably linked. The poorest populations on the planet
are the most dependent on the environment and the use of natural resources to obtain goods, shelter,
medicine, livelihoods, and opportunities for generating income. Moreover, their capacity for ecological
and social adaptation is limited. Therefore, the impact of the degradation of these resources, and the
limitation or elimination of access to them, have a greater effect on the impoverished, even though the
causes of environmental degradation are, to a large extent, to be found in the more developed groups
and countries.
Spanish Cooperation believes that considering biodiversity, climate change and human livelihoods
together is a basic aspect of sustainable poverty reduction. With this in mind, it promotes cooperative
actions in which economic and social development and environmental protection strengthen each other
mutually, through building patterns of sustainable development and conserving the productive capacity of
natural ecosystems for future generations.
In particular, the Azahar programme targets countries in the Mediterranean Basin, with the aim of
addressing the development of local populations and the improvement of their living conditions; the
protection of the environment; and the strengthening of organizations and institutions, enhancing local
planning and management capacities.
I hope that the discussions held during the conference will make a substantial contribution to the existing
knowledge about the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, and will help to identify realistic solutions
to maintain the quality of the biodiversity in the region, bringing people together to establish ongoing
dialogue on this issue.
9
Biodiversity and climate change
responses for South-East Europe
policy
By Jelena Cvetkovic, Assistant Minister and Minister’s representative,
Ministry of Environmental Protection of Serbia
The climate change (with its consequences) is a major issue that
gives rise to concerns at global, national, and local scales. SouthEast European countries are becoming increasingly aware that
climate change represents a fundamental challenge to human
health and well-being, environment and economy. At the present
time, the vast majority of discussion at the international policy
level has focused on mitigation – the critically important response of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Mitigation is essential to slow down the rate, and ultimately to limit the magnitude, of climate change.
There is, however, less awareness of the fact that, regardless of the success of global mitigation
initiatives, further climate change and associated impacts are unavoidable. Even if greenhouse gas
concentrations were stabilized, warming and sea level rise would continue for centuries due to the nature
of the climate system and feedbacks (e.g. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007).
As reported in the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change –
IPCC AR4: ‘In Southern Europe, climate change is projected to worsen conditions (high temperature and
drought) in a region already vulnerable to climate variability, and to reduce water availability,
hydropower potential, summer tourism and, in general, crop productivity. It is also projected to increase
health risks due to heat-waves, and the frequency of wildfires’.
It is evident that climate change issues have major importance in maintaining sustainable development
paths of South-East European countries.
In recent years, there has been a strong move from science and understanding to mainstream policy and
action to address climate change, at different levels – international/global, regional/European,
subregional and national.
UNFCCC, Kyoto, the CBD, the Desertification Convention, etc. are global policy initiatives dealing with
climate change and biodiversity issues. The Bali Action Plan is launching a comprehensive process to
enable the full, effective and sustained implementation of the convention and emphasizing the urgency to
address climate change as indicated in the Fourth IPCC Report, by addressing, inter alia ‘Enhanced
national/international action on mitigation of climate change and enhanced action on adaptation,
including international cooperation to support urgent implementation of adaptation action, including
through vulnerability assessment, prioritization of action, financial needs assessment, response
strategies, integration of adaptative actions into sectoral and national planning, projects and
programmes’.
At European level, the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP), the EU Green Paper on adapting to
climate change in Europe and the White Paper that will be ready in autumn 2008 are policy initiatives
tackling climate change impact at EU level.
Taking into consideration harmful impacts of climate change on various components of the environment
including humans and their activities, it is of utmost importance to engage all national capacities in order
to prevent and minimize these impacts. Moreover, it is equally important to develop regional and
international cooperation in order to share experiences, knowledge and information related to climate
change and its impacts on overall environment.
According to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, it has been estimated that the SEE region has been
identified as one of the regions most severely affected by consequences of climate change.
Certainly, one of the most important harmful impacts of climate change refers to degradation of natural
resources, including biological diversity, which directly may impact human economy and food supplies.
According to the scientific projections, there will be increasing problems for local and regional
communities that depend on the services provided by ecosystems to sustain acceptable living conditions
and welfare. In this respect, implementation of the Rio Convention related to biodiversity conservation,
10
desertification and climate change, should be regulated integrally and systematically respecting the
principles of the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity into and to make efforts to mobilize the
necessary resources concerning the harmful impact on climate change and biodiversity.
Climate change significantly endangers overall biodiversity of land and aquatic ecosystems in the SEE
region and many species are being faced with risk of extinction due to degraded life conditions. The
impact of climate change is reflected in extended warm and drought periods, increased frequency of
extreme weather conditions and changes in water regimes.
One of the issues that was raised during the 9th Conference of the parties of the CBD (COP9), held in
Bonn, Germany, May 2008 referred to the proposed response activities related to strengthening the
implementation of the Programmes of work of the CBD. Some of the activities refer to the identification
of common regional interest on biodiversity and climate change, defining models of effects of climate
change impact on ecosystems and species, establishing the system of monitoring, building institutional
capacities and exchanging knowledge related to the implementation of the Rio Convention, the Kyiv and
Belgrade resolutions on Biodiversity within the PEBLDS and Council of Europe activities.
It is evident that some of the SEE countries have implemented a great number of activities in order to
reach international biodiversity and climate change targets, including the integration into economic and
environmental policies through development of national biodiversity strategies and action plans, climate
change mitigation strategies and national adaptation plans under the UNFCCC.
The SEE region has placed climate change at the top of the regional cooperation agenda. The countries
have demonstrated a great concern and readiness to join efforts and enhance their subregional capacities
to combat climate change.
Recognizing the importance of climate change for sustainable development and poverty eradication in
SEE region, together with the importance of integrating climate change considerations into the
development of key economic sectors in SEE countries to protect the environment and facilitate
partnership and cooperation between the SEE countries, and taking full advantage of the UNECE
Environment for Europe process, the Belgrade initiative on enhancing the regional SEE cooperation in the
field of climate change was adopted during the Sixth UNECE Ministerial Conference ‘Environment for
Europe’, held in Belgrade, Serbia, in October 2007.
The purpose of SEE CCFAP (Climate Change Framework Action Plan) is to build and/or to strengthen the
existing capacities to deal with climate change issues jointly in SEE. The vision is to enhance subregional
cooperation and establish long-term partnerships in order to pull resources available in the region
together in combating climate change. The goals are to raise climate change awareness amongst all
relevant groups – the highest level governmental officials, policymakers, scientific community, civil
society organizations and general public – and by doing so to contribute to a faster EU stabilization and
association process within SEE countries, and complying with the EU requirements in the field of climate
change.
The cross-boundary character of different types of climate extremes and cross-sectoral linkages required
to manage climate change risk in adaptation entails institutional coordination, capacity building, and
collaboration within and between neighbouring countries, i.e. between ministries competent for
environment, management of natural resources, biodiversity, health, education and meteorological and
hydrological services.
Based on current knowledge, impact and vulnerability assessment and climate-change risk management
become vital and urgent components of coping with and adapting to climate change.
11
3
International, European and regional policy frameworks
and actions for addressing climate change and
biodiversity in South-East Europe
Convention on Biological Diversity and panEuropean policy targets and instruments
dealing with climate change impacts on
biodiversity
By Ivonne Higuero, Ecosystems Management and Biodiversity sub
programme Coordinator United Nations Environment Programme,
Regional Office for Europe
There are a number of international and regional instruments that
deal with climate change impacts on biodiversity. The most
important and relevant international, legally-binding instrument is
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The CBD has progressively integrated climate change
issues in the decisions of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD (CBD COP) since 2000 at the Fifth
Meeting of the CBD COP where the risks of climate change to coral reefs and to forest ecosystems were
highlighted. In 2001, the CBD’s Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice
(SBSTTA) established an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group and published an assessment of the
interlinkages between biodiversity and climate change. Later the CBD COP in 2004 adopted climate
change and biodiversity as a cross-cutting theme and encouraged Parties to the Convention to take
measures to manage ecosystems so as to maintain their resilience to extreme climate events and to help
mitigate and adapt to climate change. The SBSTTA was requested to provide guidance for synergies
amongst activities between the CBD and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC). A report was produced by the Expert Group on Biodiversity and Adaptation to Climate Change
providing this guidance. The CBD collaborates with the UNFCCC on technology transfer, reducing
emissions from deforestation, adaptation and vulnerability. At its Eighth Meeting, the CBD COP stressed
the importance of integrating biodiversity considerations into all relevant national policies, programmes
and plans in response to climate change and to develop tools for the implementation of biodiversity
conservation activities that contribute to climate change adaptation.
At the recent CBD COP in Bonn in May 2008, it was decided: to integrate climate change considerations
in each programme of work of the CBD, considering the assessment of potential impacts of climate
change and both the positive and negative impacts of climate change mitigation and adaptation activities
on relevant ecosystems; to enhance integration of climate change considerations related to biodiversity in
the implementation of the Convention, with the full and effective involvement of relevant stakeholders;
the Executive Secretary was asked to collaborate with the Secretariats of the other Rio conventions while
recognizing the distinct mandates of each convention, the need to avoid duplication and promote cost
savings; welcomed the consideration of REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and ecosystem
degradation) in the UNFCCC, and invited the UNFCCC to take full account of opportunities for its work to
provide benefits for biodiversity; and to recognize the need to provide biodiversity-relevant information to
the UNFCCC processes in a timely manner. However, there were some difficulties in dealing with hot
mitigation issues: biofuels, GM trees and ocean fertilization.
At the pan-European level, in 2003, the Ministers of Environment at the Fifth ‘Environment for Europe’
Ministerial Conference adopted the Kyiv Resolution on Biodiversity, a non-legally binding resolution to
halt the loss of biodiversity by 2010. It includes sub-targets on forest biodiversity, agricultural
biodiversity, protected areas and ecological networks, invasive alien species, biodiversity monitoring and
indicators, financing biodiversity and communication and public awareness but does not include a target
on climate change. It was not until the Sixth ‘Environment for Europe’ Ministerial Conference, when the
Ministers in the Belgrade Statement on Biodiversity recognized that biodiversity provides resilience to
climate change, the challenge of the effects of climate change on endemic hotspots and the impacts of
climate change on European habitats and species. They also stressed the need for an intersectoral
approach to climate change and supported and welcomed the Chair's Conclusions of the March 2007
G8+meeting in Potsdam, Germany, highlighting that climate change and the loss of biodiversity are
12
serious global challenges. They supported the confirmation by the CBD SBSTTA and representatives of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the growing negative impact of climate change on
biodiversity and committed to support the Pan-European Ecological Network (PEEN) as an important
means for adaptation and mitigation of climate change effects.
EU policy on climate change impacts on
biodiversity
By Ana Nieto, Project Manager ECNC-European Centre for Nature
Conservation
Climate change is a vitally important policy issue at EU level. Several
EU sectoral policies deal with climate change issues and some of
them target directly or indirectly biodiversity. This section explains
the main current policy instruments and policy developments at EU
level to tackle climate change impacts. Part of the information
provided is based on the EC website (http://ec.europa.eu/).
EU biodiversity policy
1) Natura 2000 network – Nature directives
Natura 2000 is the centrepiece of EU nature and biodiversity policy. It is an EU-wide network of nature
protection areas established under the Habitats Directive (1992) with the aim to assure the long-term
survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats. Currently the Natura 2000
network consists of 26,000 protected areas covering all Member States, which represent 20% of EU
territory. It is comprised of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated by Member States under the
Habitats Directive, and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) also designated by the Member States under the
Birds Directive (1979).
Article 10 of the Habitats Directive recognizes the need to provide ecological coherence of the Natura
2000 network to ensure the long-term survival of many species and habitats. It is of particular relevance
in the context of climate change impacts.
2) EC Biodiversity Strategy (1998)
The aim of this strategy is to anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of significant reduction or loss of
biodiversity at the source. The EC Biodiversity Strategy is the EU application of Article 6 of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, the ‘National’ Biodiversity Strategy for the EU territory. This strategy emphasizes the
relations with other sectors and policy areas. However, no direct link with climate change is specified.
In the light of the 2010 target of halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 a revision of this strategy was
made, which resulted in the publication of the EC Biodiversity Communication 2006 ‘Halting the loss of
biodiversity by 2010 - and beyond’ and Action Plan.
3) EC Biodiversity Communication ‘Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010- and beyond’ and action plan
(2006)
This Communication and its detailed Action Plan set out a detailed agenda for action to halt the loss of
biodiversity by 2010. It proposes 10 priority objectives within four policy areas, and about 120 actions.
One policy area targets specifically biodiversity and climate change and one objective (objective 9) aims
at supporting biodiversity adaptation to climate change with the following targets:
•
•
•
•
Target 9.1: 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions achieved by 2010.
Target 9.2: Global annual mean surface temperature increase limited to not more than 2ºC above
pre-industrial levels.
Target 9.3: Climate change adaptation and mitigation measure from 2006 onwards delivering biodiversity
benefits and any negative impacts on biodiversity prevented or minimized, from 2006 onwards.
Target 9.4: Resilience of EU biodiversity to climate change substantially strengthened by 2010.
4) Streamlining European 2010 Biodiversity Indicators – SEBI2010
SEBI2010 is not an EU policy instrument as such but an initiative that provides a framework for reporting
towards European polices. It aims at developing a set of indicators to monitor progress towards and help
13
achieve the 2010 target. There has been significant progress within SEBI2010 since its start in January
2005, after the adoption by the European Council of the 15 EU Headline Biodiversity Indicators, based on
the CBD indicators set. Currently 26 (initial) indicators have been proposed, including an indicator on the
impact of climate change on biodiversity.
The SEBI2010 process is led by the EEA, ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation, UNEP-WCMC
with support from EC, PEBLDS and other experts and NGOs.
EU climate change policy
1) European Climate Change Programme (ECCP)
The EC launched the ECCP in June 2000 with the aim to help ensure that the EU meets its target for
reducing emissions under the Kyoto Protocol (cutting its greenhouse gas emissions to 8% below 1990
levels by 2008-2012). Through the two phases of the ECCP programme ECCP I (2000-2004) and ECCP II
(2005- ) efforts have been made to identify the most cost-effective policies and measures at European
level to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
No direct link with biodiversity is made under this instrument.
2) EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) (2005)
The aim of the EU ETS is to help EU Member States achieve compliance with their commitments under
the Kyoto Protocol. The scheme is based on Directive 2003/87/EC, which entered into force on 25
October 2003.
As part of the EU ETS, in January 2008 the EC proposed a major package of measures to achieve the EU
targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing renewable energy. The EU has committed
to reducing its overall emissions to at least 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, and is ready to scale up this
reduction to as much as 30% under a new global climate change agreement if other developed countries
make comparable efforts. It has also set itself the target of increasing the share of renewables in energy
use to 20% by 2020.
No direct link with biodiversity is made under this instrument.
Policy developments
1) Green Paper ‘Adaptation to climate change in Europe - options for EU action’ (June 2007), built upon
the ECCP
On 29 June 2007, the European Commission adopted its first policy document on adapting to the impacts
of climate change. This Green Paper ‘Adaptation to climate change in Europe - options for EU action’,
builds upon the ECCP and its purpose is to stimulate debate and launch consultation process towards an
adaptation strategy for Europe. The Green Paper highlights that next to deep cuts in greenhouse gas
emissions, it is needed to adapt to the changing climate conditions and it sets out a four-action approach
at Community level:
•
•
•
•
The first covers early action in areas from agriculture to trade that are backed by EU policies and
available Community funds.
The second recommends integration of adaptation into existing EU external actions, in particular its
promotion in developing countries.
The third calls for intensified climate research, in particular on the impacts of global warming, and
technological innovation.
The fourth is about involving all segments of society, business and the public in the further
development of adaptation strategies.
2) White Paper ‘Adapting to Climate Change in Europe – Towards a framework for EU action’ (autumn 2008)
Following the Green Paper a stakeholder consultation, hosted by DG Environment in Brussels, took place
in order to aid the process of moving forward towards development of a White Paper on adaptation to
climate change which is due to be adopted by the Commission in the autumn of 2008.
3) Strategy Paper on biodiversity and climate change
In the medium term the EC expects to produce a strategy paper on biodiversity and climate change. The
strategy will promote the development of policy instruments to protect biodiversity under changing
conditions and will ensure that climate change policies do not come at the expense of biodiversity.
14
4
Regional impacts and response to climate change on
biodiversity and ecosystem services in SEE
Climate change impacts on biodiversity and
ecosystem services in Europe and SouthEast Europe
By Prof. Martin T. Sykes, Department of Physical Geography &
Ecosystems Analysis, Lund University, Sweden
The following is based on work associated with the EU (6th
Framework Programme) funded projects ALARM, MACIS,
RUBICODE, ECOCHANGE.
Scenarios of climate change in Europe over the 21st century show
most warming in the North. The degree of warming, however, depends on the particular emission
scenario and general circulation model used. Predictions about future precipitation change are even more
uncertain, though most models show likely increases in precipitation in the North and reduced
precipitation around the Mediterranean, particularly in Spain and South-East Europe.
Aspects of climate (bioclimatic variables) that are important for species include winter temperatures (cold
kills), growing season length (needed to complete life cycles), some measure of how precipitation affects
species, a drought index (e.g. actual/potential evapotranspiration). Simulations of the changing climate
space described by these bioclimatic values alone show that under a 2°C warming current bioclimatic
space from some parts of the Mediterranean might only be found 500-600 km to the North-East, while
under 4°C warming relevant bioclimatic space could be more than 1000 km to the North-East. In some
areas of Spain and the UK, for example, current bioclimatic space may no longer be available anywhere
in a future Europe.
Simulations involving hundreds of plant species show that species currently restricted to mountainous
areas in Spain, the Alps, South-East Europe and Scandinavia are likely to undergo local extinctions
because they will have nowhere to migrate to. Trophic interactions among species are likely to be
affected, where the climate responses for a species e.g. butterfly and its host plant are different. This
could be further aggravated if migration across a fragmented landscape is difficult.
Under future climates, habitats will change and this may have significant effects for example on Natura
2000 sites. Many sites in Southern Europe and in mountains are likely to change from one type of
vegetation or biome to another. However, the direct effect of increased concentrations of atmospheric
CO2 on plant physiology (photosynthesis) may give some plant species added advantages in dry
situations because of water use efficiency effects.
Invasive or exotic species will respond to climate change along with so-called native species. This may
lead to increasing populations of non-native species that may outcompete local species, e.g.
Trachycarpus in Southern Switzerland.
Ecosystem services such as water supply or carbon storage/emissions will change and in Southern areas
increased water stress is likely to go along with increasing carbon emissions to the atmosphere through
both increased soil respiration but also through increased incidence of fire.
Understanding the effects of climate change on ecosystem services including biodiversity into the future
requires a coupled socio-ecological modelling development and application where socio-economic
decision-making is coupled to ecosystem and biodiversity models to allow for interactions and feedbacks.
15
5
Direct impacts of climate change on biodiversity and
ecosystem services, and policy response – examples
from the South-East European region
[Note: All of the following presentations are based on country reports that may be found in full in the
technical background report: Laušević, R., L. Jones-Walters and A. Nieto (2008): Climate change and
biodiversity in South-East Europe – impacts and action. REC, Szentendre, Hungary; ECNC, Tilburg, the
Netherlands]
Albania
By Ferdinand Bego, PhD., Tirana University, Museum of Natural
Sciences
Albania’s National Biodiversity Reports (1999 and 2007) and State
of Environment reports (1995-2005) have shown that as a direct
consequence of continuing human activities, many of the natural
ecosystems in Albania, habitats and species are already under
severe stress.
During the last 25 years, approximately 122 species of
vertebrates (27 mammals, 89 birds, and 6 fish) and four species of plants have lost more than 50% of
their population. The number of rare and threatened species of plants and animals is high and expected
to increase. Two species of plants and four species of mammals are totally extinct, while 17 species of
birds do not nest anymore in Albania. Today, 36% of the country’s vertebrates are included in the
Albanian Red Data Book. There is no doubt that we are facing real and serious threats to our biodiversity.
These threats are likely to be even more damaging and severe to biodiversity under the influence of
climate changes.
Regardless of the information gaps and uncertainties, some major potential impacts of climate changes
on Albania’s landscape and biological diversity can be predicted, such as (i) increase of coastal erosion
particularly along the sandy coast of the Adriatic Sea, leading to further degradation of sand dunes and
coastal wetlands, increased salinity, reduction of fresh and brackish water habitats and species, including
alluvial forests; (ii) decrease in rangeland productivity, including an increase risk of degradation, soil
erosion, and desertification, an increasing sensitivity to disturbance, a change in ecosystem function, and
alteration to plant and animal community composition; (iii) reduction of the coverage of broadleaf and
conifer forests, particularly beech (Fagus sylvatica) and fir forests (Abies alba, Picea abies, etc.), likely to
be replaced by Mediterranean evergreen shrubs and oak woodlands; (iv) changes in vegetation
composition in forests, changes in structure, productivity and foliage quality; (v) increase in fire
frequency and intensity; (vi) large reductions in snow cover are likely to lead to declines in alpine flora
and fauna as a result of changes to habitats, alterations in fire regimes and incursion of feral animals and
weeds.
Committed to play its role in the implementation of the UNFCCC, Albania has addressed the mitigation
and adaptation measures through the National Climate Change Strategy, which consists of a set of
priorities for action in order to integrate climate change concerns into other economic development plans.
This strategy is elaborated in the frame of Albania’s First National Communication (FNC). The abatement
scenario of emissions foresees the introduction and implementation of different options mainly focused on
energy saving and energy efficiency measures. A basket of 25 GHG (greenhouse gas) mitigation
measures for the energy and transport sector is proposed in the frame of this study, which are then
analysed in terms of cost and benefit. The above measures consist of thermal insulation in housing,
efficient bulbs, solar thermal, LPG (cooking, heating), small schemes SHP, fuel switching in industry, etc.
In addition to that, some other priority actions to address the impacts of climate change on biodiversity
and ecosystem services are required, and they may include the following:
16
•
•
•
•
•
Bringing of climate information, together with an understanding of ecosystem dynamics, into
management decisions (such as for fire management, culling permits, harvest licenses, river flows,
visitor numbers).
Mainstreaming climate change into national planning and policy, through continuation of the process
of bringing climate change into national planning and policy.
Immediate preservation of components of biodiversity sensitive to climate change. A first step is to
identify threatening processes and threatened species or communities. If there are insufficient
resources for managing problem situations, straightforward guidelines and priorities will be needed.
Facilitating long-term adaptation through: (i) improved management of existing nature reserves of
high conservation values (protected areas); (ii) considering the effects of climate change when
building up a comprehensive, adequate and representative network of protected areas (Ecological
Network-ECONET).
Support to monitoring and research. There is very little information to guide priorities for managing
climate change. Focused research is needed, as well as predictions of future impacts, if an active
adaptive management approach is to be adopted. Key elements in ecosystems of concern will need
to be monitored. Monitoring will be very important for enabling progressive adaptation to climate
changes as they occur. Monitoring activities should be undertaken for clearly defined purposes:
either to make specific decisions or to learn about the ecosystem or species of concern.
Bosnia-Herzegovina
By Goran Trbić, Head of Geography Department University of Banja
Luka, Faculty of Natural Science and Mathematics
Bosnia and Herzegovina has a particularly rich biodiversity due to its
location in three distinct geological and climatic regions: the
Mediterranean region, the Euro Siberian-Bore American region and
the Alpine-Nordic region. Vascular flora counts for about 5000
confirmed taxa of species, subspecies, and variety and form level. As
much as about 30% of the total endemic flora in the Balkans (1800
species) is contained within the flora of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Bosnia-Herzegovina has an extremely high level of diversity of biotopes (habitats), i.e. geodiversity due
to its specific orography, geological surface, hydrology and ecoclimate.
Centuries of coexistence and a broad range of interactivity between biological and geological diversity,
are best reflected in an extremely high diversity of landscapes, in the whole area of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Many landscapes are now changed, divested, and degraded through different anthropogenic activities and
transformed into lower forms of ecological organization.
Global climate change impact on biodiversity is nowadays more exposed and many studies have been
published on this subject, some of them relating to agriculture and forestry. However, there are not
sufficient studies that focus on climate changing issues and their regional and local influences on
biodiversity, their sensitivity and adaptation.
Bosnia-Herzegovina did not make an INC (Initial National Communication; UNFCCC) and now is facing
that problem.
The INC should be the base of future research on the influence, vulnerability and adaptation of
biodiversity on climate changes.
The areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina which are the most sensitive to climate change are defined by the
strategy for the protection of biodiversity, including an action plan. The sensitive areas exposed to strong
pressure of changing climatic conditions are as follows:
•
•
High-mountainous ecosystems (higher than 1600 m above sea level; e.g. Bjelasnica, Maglic, Igman,
Volujak, Snjeznica, Vlasic).
Mountain ecosystems (from 900 to 1600 m above sea level, e.g. Klekovaca, Vitorog, Jahorina,
Romanija, Kozara, etc.).
17
•
•
•
•
•
Ecosystems of submediterranean forests and underwoods (from 300 to 800 m above sea level; e.g.
Eastern and Western Herzegovina).
Ecosystems of karst caves, basins and abysses; e.g. Herzegovina region, the best known is the
Vjetrenica cave.
Ecosystems of highlands (from 600 to 900 m above sea level; e.g. Central, Eastern, North-Western
and South-Eastern Bosnia).
Ecosystems of Peri-Pannonian area (from 200 to 600 m above sea level; e.g. Kozara, Prosara,
Motajica, Trebovac, Majevica).
Pannonian ecosystems (up to 200 m above sea level; e.g. Bosnian Posavina – Lijevce polje, Semberija).
According to a recent study of high-mountainous and mountain ecosystems, Bosnia-Herzegovina is
exposed to a high impact of climate change. The areas whose altitude is higher than 1500 metres above
sea level have a faster increase of average temperature than when compared with the areas of different
altitude. Extremes in temperature represent the biggest pressure that is being exerted on the areas,
which is especially visible in warmer seasons of the year, leading to melting and drying and, with it, to a
threat that many glacial and boreal relicts and their habitat would be destroyed.
With regard to forest ecosystems, the most endangered species are the fir tree forests, which, taking into
account the temperature and humidity, have a very narrow ecological valence. The beech tree forests
have a very broad ecological valence, and it is expected that they will become more prevalent in forests
which are composed of a combination of both beech trees and fir trees.
Ecosystems of submediterranean forests and underwoods, and of karst caves and basins, as a result of
global climate changes, are under pressure by the soil becoming sour.
Peri-Pannonian and hilly ecosystems are the most in danger only after high-mountainous and mountain
ecosystems. If we take into account the calculated changes of temperature, the biggest pressure would
be exerted on the oak tree forests, i.e. the cork oak tree and English oak tree forests. The cork oak tree
forests are the lowest forests on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the range of altitude they grow
at is from 280 to 860 m (altitude amplitude is very low – 580 m). Moving of the cork oak tree and English
oak tree onto the areas of higher altitude is not possible due to their heavy seed. Pannonian ecosystems
(natural and cultural) are endangered the most by floods, as one of the main factors which significantly
change the quality of a habitat.
The floods have a high percentage of nutrients, which contribute to the nitrification of the soil and
underground waters. The floods are one of the dominant factors in the expansion of invasive species. In
this way, in the area of Bosnian Panonija many species of weeds have found their habitat. With the aim
of preventing flooding, along the River Sava the levees have been raised, which significantly changed the
shape of the natural surroundings of those areas.
A key problem of the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services in BosniaHerzegovina is the low adaptation capacity of forest ecosystems. Undertaking of responsive measures in
terms of maintaining the forests can to a certain extent reduce the social and economic consequences of
a decay of forests under the influence of global climate changes. Defining the protection measures for
forest ecosystems requires more advanced research of the impacts, and an analysis of the socioeconomic potentials leading to a decay of forests.
The existing relevant policies at national and subnational levels, including adaptation and mitigation
strategies in Bosnia-Herzegovina include:
•
•
•
•
•
18
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was ratified by the Government
of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 2000, and the country as a Non-Annex I Party is fully committed to
meeting its requirements, but further active work on these issues is needed.
The Kyoto Protocol was recently ratified (in July 2007) in line with the country’s strategic goals for
accession to the European Union.
Initial National Communication to UNFCCC for Bosnia-Herzegovina is still not developed, and
adaptation measures have not been identified yet.
It is important to note that there is recognition in the country for the urgent need of undertaking
actions for preparation of the First National Communication Report.
The level of existing capacities can be estimated as low.
•
The preparation of the Initial (First) National Communication, together with development of the
National Strategy and Action Plan for Climate Change related to implementation of UNFCCC and its
Kyoto Protocol, as well as National CDM strategy, are of the utmost importance, given the fact that
they represent the basis for compliance and continuation of other related activities.
However there are some disadvantages and limitations with regard to the implementation of policy
frameworks, which include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bosnia-Herzegovina has not implemented the First National Report on Climate Change (INC).
Incoherence and lack of harmonization of strategic and development-related documents (in the
sectors of forestry, agriculture and water management) with the field of managing biodiversity.
Lack of defined social-related research, with the aim of resolving current problems in the field of
biodiversity and implementation of relevant international conventions and directives.
Very low public awareness of the importance of biological diversity for the purpose of preserving
fundamental values of the environment, and especially in regulating climate change.
Extremely low number of scientists and experts, as well as of institutions dealing with biodiversity
and its maintenance.
Lack of financial means and funds for scientific research in the field of climate change and
biodiversity, as well as the environment as a whole.
Considering these limitations, priority areas for improvement include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implementation of the First National Report on Climate Change (INC) and, within its framework,
determining the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, as well as measures for adaptation.
Setting a framework which defines long-term activities regarding the solving of the problems related
to climate change.
Setting a framework for the adoption of a national strategy on adaptation to climate change, and an
overall plan for adaptation.
Defining measures and activities for alleviating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and
ecosystems in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Improvement of knowledge about global climate change, especially about the anthropogenic impacts
on global changes, and their potential impact on the biodiversity of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Development and conducting of a sensitivity and vulnerability analysis of ecosystems (including agroecosystems) and habitats to project climate change.
Development of recommendations for monitoring and adaptive measures for conservation and
restoration.
Evaluation of the existing ambient monitoring programme to determine whether additional
biodiversity monitoring will be needed as new climate change information emerges.
Development of scientific tools to evaluate the effects of climate change on local fish and wildlife
populations and habitats.
Analysis of the vulnerability of forest resources to climate change (special attention will be paid to
understanding and developing management practices to reduce the risk of forest fires and insect
disturbances).
Extensive educational assistance to small landowners, increased ability to fire management planning,
and sound management of public lands.
Development of climate-impacted database and products on emerging forest practices (e.g.
reforestation techniques and pest management) that are considered most adaptive to climate
change, as well as information on how to reduce risks of forest fires and insect disturbance.
Montenegro
By Mirjana Ivanov, Head of Meteorological Department Hydrometeorological Institute of Montenegro
Complex climate characteristics of Montenegro in terms of high
variability in space and time are defined by geographical position,
vicinity of the sea, morphological profiles and air masses
circulation. The Montenegrin biodiversity is characterized by a
considerable amount of endemism, especially dominant with mid-
19
European, Illiric, Alpine and Mediterranean elements, which makes Montenegro one of the most diverse
countries in Europe.
Part of the temperature analysis is given below in order to show that significant changes in temperature
occur in the period 1991-2005 with respect to the 1961-1990 reference.
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
Podgorica
2.5
odstupanje (C)
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
odstupanja od normale (C)
Zabljak
Also in Montenegro, significant changes in the frequency of extreme weather events have been taking
place leading to floods, droughts, etc.
How biodiversity is affected by these changes, what are the gaps in determination of these impacts, are
analysed through the interactions between species, food production and natural resources. It is evident
that there is a lack of adequate data and research in the field of climate change and biodiversity.
Relevant national policies/strategies and actions concerning climate change include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Law on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, 2005.
Law on Protection of Air against Pollution (1980) – updated and new draft Law on Air Quality was
prepared.
Draft Energy Strategy.
Preparation of a pilot Strategic Environmental Assessment, to assess the environmental and
associated socio-economic impacts of the suggested and alternative options given in the Draft
Energy Strategy.
GEF/UNDP NCSA project, 2006-2007, for capacity building for implementation UNFCCC.
Thematic Report for the UNFCCC.
Project for preparation of the First National Communication.
Assessment and preparation of CDM projects.
However, the existing legislation is insufficient for the implementation of existing and future plans in the
field of climate change, as climate change issues are treated in a general manner. There is a lack of
regulations that deal with the creation and operation of the national system for the assessment of GHG as
required by the Convention.
In addition there are no specialized units dealing with climate change issues in the ministries.
Recommendations to improve the situation include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
20
To pursue mitigation and adaptation through policy instruments.
To examine how business development activities can take such links into account.
To upgrade technical equipment.
To make more precise forecasts and projections of climate change impacts in Montenegro.
To develop and implement a climate change adaptation plan.
To identify real status of GHG from agriculture and forests.
To adopt biodiversity based adaptive and mitigating strategies.
To maintain and restore native ecosystem.
To establish networks of terrestrial, freshwater and marine protected areas with respect to the
climate change projections.
•
Effective use of nitrogen fertilizer and repression of the practice of burning organic residues after the
harvest.
However, initiative is being undertaken in Montenegro to tackle the impacts of climate change on
biodiversity, compared to other SEE countries which still are in a preparation phase.
Serbia
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe,
Szentendre, Hungary; Prof. Dr Vladimir Stevanović, Head of
Department of Plant Ecology and Phytogeography University of
Belgrade, Serbia
The impacts of a progressively changing climate, such as rising
average temperatures and increases in the frequency and severity
of extreme events, droughts and floods, are already affecting
biodiversity and ecosystems in Serbia. Species that are already
threatened are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. In numerous areas in Serbia,
fragmentation of ecosystems and natural habitats results in the reduction of the area of activities of
individual species. Degradation and change of land use, especially at the expense of forests, causes huge
changes in habitats. Mountain regions are in particular endangered in Serbia. In some national parks
(Kopaonik, Tara) and nature parks (Stara Planina), the pressure of increased tourism is additionally
threatening biodiversity.
More information about current and expected impacts of climate change is needed to guide biodiversity
conservation programmes and to direct biodiversity research. A priority action should be the
establishment of the Biological Diversity Advisory Working Group at the national level.
The most important actions for the preservation of biodiversity should consider: prevention of further
forest clearing; reduction of agricultural land and wherever possible converting it into forest ecosystem;
prevention of loss and fragmentation of habitats; preservation of indigenous biodiversity by the network
of protected areas (national parks, strict and special nature reserves, natural parks); establishment of a
connected, comprehensive system of reserved areas; ex situ conservation of species that cannot survive
future climate change; enabling reintroduction of extinct species; prevention of introduction of new
invasive species and suppression of the species likely to become invasive under climate change.
Turkey
By C. Can Bilgin, Department of Biology, Middle East Technical
University, Ankara; Murat Türkeş, Department of Geography,
Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale
Turkey is a mountainous country, featuring a rich variety of
climate regimes, land forms and geological features. Its
biodiversity reflects this richness, with an estimated 100,000
species of animals, plants, fungi and other organisms, and high
levels of endemism, particularly among flowering plants. It has a
Mediterranean-type macroclimate, mainly a result of seasonal
alternation between mid-latitude frontal cyclones and subtropical high pressure systems, but is also
seasonally influenced by the Asiatic monsoonal circulation or the Siberia anticyclone.
Global climate predictions indicate that Turkey is likely to be severely affected by climate change like
other countries in the Mediterranean basin. Preliminary research at a regional level has shown that the
expected climate change will involve by the end of this century – especially in the west and south of the
country – 5-6°C increases in mean temperatures and up to 40% decreased rainfall, particularly in winter.
The combined effects of decreases in precipitation and increases in temperature are expected to lower
surface water runoff by up to 50%.
21
Several aspects of the biodiversity of Turkey will probably be affected by climate change. Expected
outcomes include: range shifts; changes in composition and structure of natural communities; increased
risk of species extinction due to phenological mistiming, increased fragmentation, reduced population
sizes and changes in critical habitats; and accelerated desertification and regression of tree cover. A
better understanding of climate change at the regional level, mechanisms to monitor change and improve
awareness, and getting prepared to adapt for change are necessary steps that need to be taken at all
levels of government and society.
22
6
Managing the effects of climate change and increasing
the resilience of ecosystems
Safeguarding natural infrastructure
impacts of climate change
from
By Boris Erg, IUCN Programme Office for South-Eastern Europe;
Paul Grigoriev, IUCN Regional Office for Europe; Chantal van
Ham, IUCN Regional Office for Europe; Joerg Lohmann, IUCN
Programme Office for South-Eastern Europe
Scientific evidence clearly highlights the current and potential
impacts of climate change on the environment and, consequently,
on human well-being, especially poor and vulnerable communities.
IUCN stresses the need to give due consideration to the links
between climate change, equity and biodiversity, and the opportunities and challenges these links pose,
for mitigating and adapting to climate change.1
At the global level, there is high agreement and much evidence that with current climate change
mitigation policies and related sustainable development practices, global GHG emissions will continue to
grow over the next few decades. Observational evidence from all continents and most oceans shows that
many natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases.
A wide array of adaptation options is available, but more extensive adaptation than is currently occurring
is required to reduce vulnerability to climate change.2 However, particular systems, such as terrestrial,
marine, or even regions, e.g. mountainous, coastal regions, are more susceptible to climate change
effects, and thus likely to be especially affected.
It is broadly anticipated that Europe’s natural (eco)systems and biodiversity will be substantially affected
by climate change. Certain species and ecosystems are likely to have difficulty in adapting to climate
change. Anthropogenic warming could lead to some impacts that are abrupt or irreversible, depending
upon the rate and magnitude of the climate change. Biodiversity decline and the degradation or loss of
ecosystem services continue to be of major concern across the pan-European region. Biodiversity is
particularly under threat on farmland, and in mountain regions, forests and coastal zones, with losses
occurring as a result of habitat loss brought about by changes in land use and urban sprawl; pollution
causing acidification and eutrophication; the introduction of invasive species; resource overexploitation;
and climate change, leading, for example, to desertification. The global target of halting biodiversity loss
by 2010 is unlikely to be achieved without considerable additional effort.3
What makes us even more concerned? Biodiversity and protected areas (PAs) in particular as
conservation cores that provide anchors for maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services are already
being significantly affected by climate change, particularly in mountainous (alpine, glaciers), marine
(coral bleaching) and coastal (flooding, erosion) areas. Given the following facts, specific vulnerability
characteristics can be defined:
•
•
•
•
•
1
2
3
Possess isolated population pockets and fragmented ecosystems.
Low management capacity and effectiveness already.
Presence of particularly vulnerable ecosystems or ecosystem components.
Presence of species and/or ecosystems at edge of ranges.
Additional anthropogenic stresses in and around PA boundaries.
IUCN Position Paper on Climate Change to COP9, 2008.
Climate Change 2007. The Fourth Assessment Report of the UN IPCC, 2007.
The pan-European environment: glimpses into an uncertain future. EEA Report, 2007.
23
Therefore, it is of the highest importance to agree on the adaptation principles in order to be able to
tackle climate change impacts on biodiversity. Some of the principles to be called upon are:
Adapt in anticipation - rather than react after the fact.
Maintain and develop options to maximize ecosystem resilience.
Avoid fragmentation and provide for connectivity (establish new corridors or bio-links, ecological
networks), assist migration if practical and feasible.
Maintain and increase large PAs as needed and if feasible.
Pay greater attention to buffer zones around PAs to adjust PA boundaries if required – flexibility.
Protect anticipated climatic refugia at all scales.
Maintain natural processes and successional regimes as possible.
Pay particular attention to the conservation of functional groups of species such as pollinators, seed
dispersers and predators.
Protect mature and older forest stands.
Include climate change scenarios in the selection of new PAs.
Provide for restoration with the future in mind.
Use adaptive management and strategy testing.
Involve local communities in strategies.
Support ex situ conservation efforts.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In the European context, particular attention should be given to the existing array of ecological networks
– be it officially recognized Natura 20004 and the Pan-European Ecological Network (PEEN)5, or various
initiatives drawing from the same approach – the European Green Belt6, Dinaric Arc Initiative (DAI), not
to forget subset initiatives such as the Carpathian Network of Protected Areas or the Danube River
Protected Areas Network initiative – that should be considered as tools already in place through which
particular climate change adaptation principles might be implemented. By strengthening the existing and
developing new ecological networks, in parallel applying the CBD’s Ecosystem Approach7, we might
presume that the aforementioned principles will be fully integrated into our future actions to tackle
climate change impacts on biodiversity to improve their effectiveness.
Adaptation to climate change: the perspective
of WWF on the Danube
By Andreas Beckmann, Dr Christine Bratrich, Sergey Moroz, Georg
Rast, WWF International-Danube Carpathian Programme
WWF is doing a considerable amount of work related to climate
change mitigation in the Danube-Carpathian region, including
awareness-raising initiatives in Bulgaria8, Romania9 and in Serbia
(planned for autumn 2008). Earth Hour, a global event in which
participants turn off their lights for one hour to raise awareness of
energy and climate change, is planned for March 2009, with the
expected participation of Bucuresti, Sofia and Belgrade, among other cities (participation is open to any
and all! See: http://www.earthhour.org/).
Some of the expected impacts from climate change in the Danube will include increasing frequency and
scope of flood events, low flow/draughts, and increased water temperature, in turn contributing to
decreased water quality, more invasive species, reduced groundwater recharge, disconnection of
functional habitats, and reduced natural biodiversity. It should be emphasized that it is important to
4
5
6
7
8
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/index_en.htm
http://www.peblds.org/
http://www.europeangreenbelt.org/
http://www.cbd.int/programmes/cross-cutting/ecosystem/
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/europe/what_we_do/danube_carpathian/index.cfm?uNewsID=129
9
http://www.panda.org/ro/proiecte/schimbari_climatice/index.cfm
24
realize that climate change comes only on top of other drivers that have already significantly reduced the
Danube’s ability to adjust to and absorb disturbances. These include for example the loss of over 80% of
the river’s former floodplains; lack of connectivity up and down the river due to construction of dams
particularly on the upper part of the river; pollution, e.g. from agricultural runoff; and threats from
navigation.
WWF’s strategy for climate change adaptation in the Danube River basin essentially focuses on improving
the resilience of ecosystems in the river basin, with a major focus on protecting existing and restoring
former floodplains and wetland areas; ‘reconnecting’ fish migration corridors and sediment flow across
dams; and promoting low-impact approaches to navigation that seek to ‘fit the ships to the river, not the
river to the ships’. Key pieces of EU legislation, including the EU Water Framework Directive, Habitats
Directive and related legislation as well as EU funding programmes provide a good legislative and policy
framework for addressing these challenges, if they are implemented effectively.
For more information:
•
Addressing climate change in the Danube Basin:
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/europe/where/ukraine/news/index.cfm?uNewsID=118940
•
WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme: http://www.panda.org/dcpo
•
Danube Campaign: http://www.danubecampaign.org
Ecological networks as an adaptive strategy
for climate change adaptation
By Claire Vos, Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR),
Alterra, the Netherlands
Range shifts as a response to climate change have been reported
for a wide range of species. Bioclimate envelope modelling studies
project further shifts for a variety of taxa in the 21st century (e.g.
Harrison et al., 2006). Whether species will be able to colonize
new climate space depends both on species and landscape
characteristics. Warren et al. (2001) found that only butterfly
species capable of dispersing over large distances or using widely spread habitats were able to respond to
climate change by expanding northwards. In many parts of Europe, natural or semi-natural ecosystems
have become fragmented and embedded in a landscape matrix with low permeability to dispersing
individuals (Jongman & Pugnetti, 2004). This raises the question whether the current European
conservation strategy allows species that are affected by both climate change and habitat fragmentation
to expand their range into new climate space (Opdam & Wascher, 2004).
An important adaptation measure is to increase the spatial cohesion of ecosystem patterns on a large
spatial scale. Thus, isolated ecosystem networks and single patches that are within a suitable climate
zone need to be linked to the nearest climate-proof network, for instance with robust corridors (Vos et
al., 2007). In the BRANCH project (www.branchproject.org) a method was developed to identify where
improvement in spatial cohesion is most urgent (Berry et al., 2007). A European coordinated action is
needed to identify locations for ‘climate corridors’, regions where adaptation of ecosystem networks is
most urgently needed and identify cost-effective measures to create a functionally coherent network. This
could form input into the decision-making process of European countries about where and how spatial
adaptation is required and how this can be transferred into an adaptive policy.
Rather than go into further detail here, it is recommended that the reader visit the BRANCH project
website and consult the following list of references.
References:
•
Berry, P.M., A.P. Jones, R.J. Nicholls, & C.C. Vos (Eds) 2007a. Assessment of the vulnerability of
terrestrial and coastal habitats and species in Europe to climate change, Annex 2 of Planning for
biodiversity in a changing climate - BRANCH project Final Report, Natural England, UK.
25
•
•
•
•
•
Harrison, P.A., P.M. Berry, N. Butt & M. New (2006) Modelling climate change impacts on species’
distributions at the European scale: Implications for conservation policy. Environmental Science and
Policy, 9, 116-128.
Jongman, R.H. & G. Pungetti (2004) Ecological networks and greenways: concept, design,
implementation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Opdam, P. & D. Wascher (2004) Climate change meets habitat fragmentation: linking landscape and
biogeographical scale level in research and conservation. Biological Conservation, 117, 285-297.
Vos, C.C., P. Opdam, E.G. Steingröver & R. Reijnen (2007) Transferring ecological knowledge to
landscape planning: a design method for robust corridors. Key topics in landscape ecology. (Eds J.
Wu & R.J. Hobbs), pp. 227-245. Cambridge University, Cambridge.
Warren, M.S., J.K. Hill, J.A. Thomas, J. Asher, R. Fox, B. Huntley, D.B. Roy, M.G. Telfer, S. Jeffcoate,
P. Harding, G. Jeffcoate, S.G. Willis, J.N. Greatorex-Davies, D. Moss & C.D. Thomas (2001) Rapid
responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change, Nature, 414, 65-69.
Managing climate change impacts on
biodiversity in protected areas in panEurope, including Natura 2000 sites
By Neil McIntosh, Deputy Director Eurosite
As a pan-European network of 96 site managing and site owning
organizations across 26 different countries, Eurosite has access to
tremendous skills, knowledge and expertise in the practical
management of nature. Climate change is one of the most
pressing and complex problems to challenge nature conservation
organizations.
In November 2007, Eurosite coordinated a network response to the European Commission’s Green Paper
consultation on climate change. This revealed significant knowledge gaps about the impacts of climate
change on nature and biodiversity conservation and the need for more work on how to manage and how
to adapt management in ways which specifically take into account climate change. It also highlights the
need for the European Commission to provide strong leadership, direction and guidance within the
framework of an integrated response to climate change: key policies and existing legislation - for
example, the Water Framework Directive, Common Agricultural Policy and the Birds and Habitats
Directives - must be made to work better, consistently and explicitly supporting development of adaptive
management strategies. Communication and dialogue between diverse stakeholders is critical, as is the
need to develop and provide appropriate funding mechanisms, which specifically enable pan-European
action for climate change.
There is a need for improved integration between climate change related research and practical adaptive
site management, as that is crucial for effective management of the impacts of climate change, especially
within Europe’s protected areas. The Natura 2000 network of sites is, in particular, a vital testing ground
and working resource for mitigating the effects of climate change: the Natura 2000 network should be
managed as a network rather than as a collection of individual sites in order to open up real solutions to
climate change.
Above all, because of the uncertainties involved in managing sites for climate change, it is increasingly
essential that nature is managed in adaptive ways: this requires clear definitions of ecological targets for
specified sites, monitoring and ongoing evaluation of the impacts of applied management strategies and
actions.
Several areas are therefore crucial:
•
•
26
Climate change needs to be tackled in joined-up ways – Europe’s natural resources, its ecology and
biodiversity, require to be addressed as a pan-European issue.
The potential benefits of information exchange between scientific research communities and
practising site managers are currently underexploited.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Adaptive site management strategies and plans, based on sound data, offer significant opportunities
for continuous monitoring and re-evaluation of ecological targets – climates and sites will inevitably
change and that process requires to be pro-actively managed.
Restoration, resilience and networking are key concepts for effective climate change management –
it will be increasingly necessary to restore sites to favourable conservation status where it is viable,
to increase their resilience to the effects of climate change. Networks of sites are critical to climate
change mitigation and sites need to be managed within a connected landscape to facilitate species
population shifts and habitat displacement.
In practical terms, this requires site management organizations to ‘upscale’ their management
approaches and consider landscape solutions for biodiversity management.
Natura 2000 sites offer a tangible, established and logical testing ground for climate change action –
Natura 2000 sites are the ‘jewels in the crown’, which are part of a larger ecosystem and that ‘crown’
requires to be managed as well. Natura 2000 requires to be managed as a real network rather than
as a collection of individual sites: sites have a special role in cushioning the impacts of climate
change and increase the scope to support protection of non-designated areas, especially those with
potential to become ecological corridors.
There is a need to consider spatial planning and the role of and need for ecological networks: these
must be features of site management strategies and plans for individual sites to address climate
change.
Climate change is a gateway for communication and engagement – site managers should exploit
people’s concerns about climate change and other stakeholders to engage them in sustainable
management of nature.
The European Commission should spearhead and stimulate adaptive management responses to
climate change by integrating measures for adaption in all key EU policy and legislation.
In addition, vitally, the Commission must also invest in appropriate funding mechanisms to support
implementation of existing legislation – specifically the Birds and Habitats Directives – across Europe,
rather than exclusively focusing on implementation within Member States. The Natura 2000 network
of sites should be supported as a network and specific funding mechanisms should be developed
which specifically allow programmes of action at pan-European level, in addition to those at Member
State level.
Impacts, science and adaptation policy:
developing adaptation case studies in four
contrasting areas of England
By Keith Buchanan, Major Project Manager Natural England, on
behalf of Eurosite
Climate change is already impacting the natural world and, even if
we ceased all emissions now, would be with us for at least 50
years. So we need to facilitate the natural world’s adaptation to
these changes.
Dealing with the specifics of climate change, as opposed to the generalities, is very challenging but we
believe it is important to start working towards comprehensive, geographically specific assessments of
the possible impact of climate change on our heritage of wildlife, landscapes and our enjoyment of them.
Such assessments then allow us to start identifying responses which would reduce the adverse impacts
identified, i.e. an adaptation strategy. The four pilot Character Areas (CAs) are the start of that journey.
CAs, which are areas with similar biodiversity and landscape characteristics, have been chosen as there is
systematic comprehensive coverage of England and they are at a manageable subregional scale. Thus
the pilots aim to translate the emerging principles of climate change adaptation into specific actions in
specific places.
The four pilots were chosen to illustrate a range of projected climate impacts:
•
•
•
•
Cumbria High Fells (montane impacts);
Shropshire Hills (typical fragmented landscape);
Dorset Downs and Cranborne Chase (drought);
The Broads (wetland, sea level rise).
27
The basic methodology has been to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
identify significant environmental assets in the CA;
assess the projected nature of climate change by looking at biologically significant parameters
such as precipitation;
assess the impacts of the projected climate changes on the environmental assets;
propose actions to minimize the adverse impacts – the adaptation strategy.
This process and the emerging results are described in the adaptation strategies being compiled for
consultation.
The concept of connectivity, and how fragmented landscapes might be adapted to be more resilient in the
face of climate change, is a potentially important element in the response strategies.
An important principle has been the attempt to make the adaptation strategies broadly beneficial for
wildlife and landscapes. They are not driven by knowledge of dispersal for individual species, partly
because we do not have this information for most species and partly because all species will respond
differently and this would not therefore be a useful way forward for the wider countryside. Actions aimed
at individual species can, of course, be added later.
This process has come together in four internal workshops, when national Natural England experts and
regional staff came together to generate material for the first working drafts.
Subsequently, in February/March 2008, these drafts were taken to four external workshops in the
affected regions. These were technical workshops, invitees being chosen for their expertise in adaptation
or sources of data. The drafts are being revised subsequently so that they will be ready for consultation
with a wider regional audience in the summer/autumn of 2008. National partners will be briefed in
parallel to these regional discussions. To assist communications, visualizations of some of the projected
impacts and desired responses are being generated.
In relation to the external workshops, Natural England places great importance on working closely with
others on these analyses – the issues are complex and the solutions often not clear cut. It is important to
produce a working draft for the workshops, in order to focus discussion. Recipients of the drafts may well
have found little new in terms of the analysis – their significance is in the attempt to methodically build
up a picture of impact and responses on a subregional scale from the information we have which, for
climate change, is very incomplete. There are many uncertainties but we feel it is important to promote
action as climate change is already upon us. In particular, we desire to make proposed responses as
geographically specific as possible as that approach is most likely to facilitate action. On the basis of this,
the next steps to be taken are to:
•
•
•
•
•
28
publish the adaptation strategies for the 4 pilot areas;
consult local stakeholders;
construct implementation plans for agreed actions;
roll out the process to further areas of England;
broadly assess the costs of adaptation, and the contribution it would make to carbon sequestration.
7
Communication and public awareness
change impacts on biodiversity
on
climate
Public awareness in South-East Europe about
climate change impacts on biodiversity
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Hungary
As behavioural change within societies and communities depends
largely on awareness of the problem, public awareness activities
in SEE about climate change impacts on biodiversity are very
much needed. The United Nation Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol will only succeed
if its objective is widely supported by the public and by important
interest groups, including those from SEE. Furthermore, the extensive political mobilisation around the
issue of climate change over the last few years is now being intensified so as to complete agenda of the
new climate agreement that enters into force when the commitments contained in the Kyoto Protocol
expire in 2012. The new agreement must be adopted by the autumn of 2009 at the latest.
The Action Plan for Biodiversity and Climate Change in SEE which is under development envisages several
important areas for public awareness activities in SEE about climate change impacts on biodiversity.
Those activities could comprise policy debate involving relevant stakeholders (e.g. governments, local
communities, NGOs, the business sector), promotion of the ecological network concept, and PEEN in
particular, among relevant actors and in relevant forums in SEE, and support organisations from SEE in
successfully applying for funding for projects in support of ecological networks and PEEN. Well informed
and aware public can efficiently contribute in the establishment of surveillance for the arrival and spread
of non-native species, establishment of the new protected areas, and conservation and enhancement of
the local variation within sites and habitats.
Improving communication between key
stakeholders for addressing the impacts of
climate change on biodiversity
By Dr Lawrence Jones-Walters, Senior Programme Manager
There is no doubt that poor communication between stakeholders
involved in the process of managing our environment, the design
location
and
management
of
industrial
and
domestic
development, transport and transport infrastructure, energy
production and agriculture has resulted in poor decision making and an inability to achieve sustainable
development. The lack of a joined up approach has been one of the major contributory factors to climate
change. If we are to achieve effective, integrated management that delivers multifunctional landscapes
with benefits for people, livelihoods and nature then we have to communicate better.
It is relevant to think about how we define communication in this context. The traditional model involves
a sender and receiver. The sender gives a message to the receiver and expects some action to take
place; this kind of transfer of information can be compared to a radio mast sending a signal to the radio
and is called 'instrumental communication'. In actuality the sender has no idea about whether the
receiver has carried out the action, or how they may have carried out the action. This is the traditional
approach we apply to consultation in relation to, for instance, regional or local planning strategies,
management strategies for Natura 2000 sites and other similar instruments.
29
Whilst the instrumental mode of communication may work for Coca-Cola it is far less effective for
delivering messages about biodiversity. In fact we know that a different approach is required if we wish
to gain ownership from stakeholders, key actors and the general public for policies and programmes and
their delivery. How then should we communicate to improve our response to the challenges of climate
change?
Firstly we need to change the paradigms and move from instrumental communication to a participative
approach that involves people in setting goals and objectives and the framing the related policy (for
instance, a cross sectoral approach would be far more effective in making policies that make a tangible
difference to the actions that affect climate change). There are plenty of examples of where this worked
well, and the same approach can be applied at a more detailed level through the involvement of
stakeholders and local communities in setting objectives for the management of ecosystems, nature
reserves and large sites; we know that the ownership of the objectives increases significantly through
applying these methods and the delivery of targets and real actions is increased and facilitate it.
Secondly, we also need to learn how to tell stories about biodiversity (and apparently 65% of people in
Europe, even if they have heard the word, have no idea what it means). These stories should be about
issues and objects of common interest and concern; for instance, domestic animals provide many
benefits both society and for nature conservation as grazing machines. We should be able to tell
interesting stories about what the landscape would look like without these animals and what we would
lose both individually in terms of livelihoods, and more generally in terms of nature and ecosystem
services.
Finally we need to become smarter in relation to selecting target audiences, being very clear about what
we want to say and then choosing the right means to communicate a message. Apparently policymakers
spend on average less than four minutes reading any document that passes across the desk. We
therefore no face-to-face contact with this target group is likely to be the most effective means that we
can find to put across messages and communicate with them. This means that we need to make time and
put in a considerable amount of effort in establishing the relationships that are required in order for us to
even get through the door to their office.
We know that financial instruments (for instance agri-environment payments) can be a very effective way
of opening the door to a wider communication with, for instance, landowners about the management of
their land.
When communities come together it is much better to facilitate their meetings (and even better still is
that facilitator can be independent) if we wish to get the most out of them both as a group and
individually. Again, it is sometimes very hard to get people to sit around a table, and significant effort
may have to be spent in organising meetings and getting people to attend.
For some, who are lucky enough to have access, electronic networks and the information they contain
can be an extremely cost-effective means of exchanging information. Nowadays websites can contain
interactive discussion fora that allow questions to be asked and discussions to take place. They facilitate
instant access to vast amounts of information and can be an extremely effective means of communicating
key messages.
Finally, in order for all of these things to happen, somebody has to exercise some form of leadership. In
doing so they will have to sacrifice time and energy and, in the context of our current work
environments, this may take some courage. However, we know that this is possible because there are
plenty of people out there who have done it, often with extremely successful results.
30
8
Conference conclusions and recommendations
The following conclusions and recommendations were drawn up on the basis of the workshop discussions
and outcomes and the context provided by the presentations; they were prepared during the final phases
of the conference in order that they could be considered, revised and agreed by the participants
themselves.
Main conclusions – expected impacts of climate change on biodiversity
The participants concluded that Southern and South-East Europe (SEE) will be severely affected by
climate change and there is a growing body of scientific evidence showing that the effects of climate change
on biodiversity and the ‘goods and services’ that ecosystems provide (ecosystem services) are steadily
increasing. This is for various reasons of large concern, since South-East Europe contains extremely high
biodiversity richness, and the climate impact comes on top of the already existing threats to biodiversity.
From the discussions and presentations during the conference, including as regards the expert reports on
Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey, it became clear that specific impacts of
climate change on biodiversity include: increased temperatures; a rise in the frequency of extreme
weather events; increased coastal erosion, sea level rise, impact on marine biodiversity, rising water
levels in tidal rivers; increased flooding, pressure on water resources; changing agricultural landscapes,
crop failure; changes in habitats and species distribution; increasing problems caused by alien invasive
species and a decrease in the richness of biodiversity. In addition, there will be more problems for local
and regional communities that depend on the services provided by ecosystems (in the form of food,
drinking water, fuel, building materials or as a harvestable resource) to sustain acceptable living
conditions and welfare. Severe economic and financial consequences are to be expected in the near
future if climate impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services will not be mitigated.
The participants concluded that the impacts of climate change in the SEE region will jeopardize the
implementation of various national and international biodiversity policies, in particular the Convention on
Biological Diversity and European biodiversity 2010 targets of reducing or halting the decline of
biodiversity by the year 2010.
The participants recommended all relevant parties to take urgent action and the following key
recommendations for tackling climate change impacts on biodiversity in SEE region emerged from the
expert reports and the presentations and discussions of the conference:
Key recommendations for tackling climate change impacts on biodiversity
1.
The development of a strong and concrete action plan on climate change and
biodiversity for South-East Europe, while building on ongoing initiatives, including the
Belgrade Initiative on enhancing SEE regional cooperation in the field of climate change adopted
at the Sixth Ministerial UNECE Conference ‘Environment for Europe’ (October 2007, Belgrade,
Serbia) and those of EU, UN and Council of Europe. Governments in the SEE region are
encouraged to endorse and further the initiative for an action plan, while seeking support from
all relevant stakeholders, including international and national NGOs, scientific and expert
institutions, and economic sectors.
2.
Regional cooperation between countries and multi-stakeholders in SEE should be
stepped up; and within the countries, ministries and other stakeholders should enter into
constructive dialogues and joint actions for addressing the relationship between climate change
and biodiversity. Involved international NGOs are encouraged to establish synergy between their
activities on biodiversity and climate change in the SEE region.
3.
Relevant national and international governmental organizations are encouraged to
integrate biodiversity and climate change considerations in their policies, strategies
and actions, and ensure that available funds work in favour and not work against biodiversity
conservation.
31
4.
Awareness and education actions on climate change, biodiversity and ecosystem
services are of vital importance in order to reach the public, politicians and policymakers and
economic sectors. These actions need to increase and be implemented at regional, national and
subnational levels, while adopting a multi-stakeholder approach. At least one concrete and
impacting communication and awareness action should be initiated at short notice.
5.
At European, regional and national levels actions should be undertaken to fill basic gaps in
information and knowledge about the climate impacts on biodiversity in the SEE
region, including via focused and extended multidisciplinary research, policy analyses,
modelling and scenario-building, and adequate biodiversity monitoring at regional, national and
subnational levels. These actions should address both terrestrial and marine environments.
However, no action should be delayed because of gaps in information and data.
6.
Practical capacity-building in terms of increasing knowledge and human and financial
resources for addressing biodiversity and climate change in SEE is a top priority and a
vital basis for real actions.
7.
Development and implementation of adequate mitigation and adaptation measures
and guidelines for addressing the negative impacts of climate change on biodiversity,
including adaptive management (strategies) for nature sites is highly important. Wider climate
change mitigation measures should not damage biodiversity.
8.
Concrete and far-reaching measures should be implemented in order to strengthen ecological
and landscape resilience in the SEE region, including the concrete establishment and
management of protected areas and ecological networks, and of SEE- and Europe-wide climate
corridors.
9.
An active and dedicated network or forum of people and organizations on climate
change and biodiversity in the SEE region should be further developed, while building on
the contacts and dialogue established during the conference ‘Changing Climate, Changing
Biodiversity in South-East Europe’.
Based on the themes addressed
recommendations were drawn.
in
the
conference
the
following
specific
conclusions
and
Specific conclusions and recommendations
Theme: International, European and regional policy frameworks and actions for addressing climate
change and biodiversity in SEE
National and international policies are beginning to tackle the impacts of climate change on biodiversity,
but still have large gaps in terms of specific targets and measures. It is therefore recommended that:
•
•
More strategic and operational synergies between national and international policies and actions on
climate change and biodiversity for SEE are required in order to combat climate impacts adequately at
all geographical levels.
There is a strong need to improve targeted implementation at national and subnational levels of
international conventions related to biodiversity and climate change.
Theme: Regional impacts and response to climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services in SEE
Scientific and field evidence indicate that the effects of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem
services will be severe. However, in most of the target countries of this Report, large gaps in knowledge
exist. The policy response at SEE regional, national and subnational levels is still in an early phase,
although political attention for the issues is rapidly increasing in most countries. Top priority should
therefore be given to:
•
•
32
The exchange of experience and expertise between countries in SEE.
Increased cooperation between relevant ministries at national level.
•
•
Enhanced synergies between programmes of international organizations.
Involvement of all relevant stakeholders, in particular businesses and landowners.
Theme: Practical solutions and policy tools
The following actions are recommended:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Awareness raising and communication projects, including conflict-management activities, also at
subnational levels.
Adaptation strategies for biodiversity impacts of climate change.
Community programmes, involving local people and entrepreneurs.
Tailor-made capacity-building programmes, including on delivery of biodiversity policy targets and
development and implementation of projects.
Integrate, in a down-to-earth and practical way, climate change impacts on biodiversity into sectoral
policies, and economic and financial sectors.
Establish lobbies and national biodiversity and climate panels.
Sustainable protected area management.
Control of urbanization and development in coastal areas.
Create lists of species and habitats most vulnerable to climate change in SEE and establish sites to
monitor climate change. These sites should include marine areas.
Theme: Managing the effects of climate change and increasing the resilience of ecosystems
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish multi-stakeholder networks on climate change and biodiversity.
Increase the number of protected areas in land and seas, and improve the management of these
areas with new adaptive management techniques.
Prepare for climate change impacts in the preparation or review of management plans for nature sites
and national parks, including via the development of new spatial plans for designated sites.
Establish resilient ecological networks, inter alia by creating Europe-wide, and SEE-wide and national
climate ecological corridors, which will allow species to migrate as a result of climate change impacts.
Identify potential bottlenecks.
Reconsider the strategies towards native and alien species, and develop coherent actions.
Identify areas of nature restoration, while focusing on ecosystem functions.
Establish concrete capacity-building programmes and learning networks for involving local
stakeholders and land users into combating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity.
Implement risk assessment studies, especially for vulnerable areas from a point of view of biodiversity
and ecosystem services.
Develop programmes of interdisciplinary research at national and SEE levels.
Theme: Identifying solutions to manage and communicate the effects of climate change on biodiversity
•
•
New and appealing ways and means of bringing the message to the public and key stakeholder should
be adopted and implemented, while focusing on the receiver instead of the sender of the message.
Short messages should be developed, such as ‘Nature is dying – we are part of it!’ or ‘Will we be
climate change refugees?’, but also ‘You are rich by living close to nature’.
The climate and biodiversity messages should relate to the daily lives of people and businesses, and
indicate ways in which they could help to address the problems.
Keeping the momentum alive – follow-up
The participants agreed to keep the momentum of the conference alive and to work on follow-up actions.
33
The participants propose to identify, as soon as possible, at least five priority projects which could be
derived from the recommendations listed above, amongst them at least one communication and
awareness project. The projects could also figure as 'spearheads' in the Action Plan.
The participants proposed to follow-up with frequent Biodiversity and Climate Change Seminars or
conferences for the SEE region, also to discuss and monitor the implementation of actions.
The Conference requested the organizers to communicate the conclusions and recommendations of the
conference to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
34
the governments of Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey, being the target
countries for the conference;
other countries in the South-East European region, in particular Croatia, FYRO Macedonia, and the EU
countries Bulgaria, Greece, Slovenia and Romania;
the EU Commissioner of the Environment;
the SEE Ministerial Climate Change Conference, to be held in November 2008 in Montenegro; and the
upcoming UN FCCC Conference of Parties (COP) in Poznan (December 2008) and Copenhagen
(2009);
the Director-General of UN-Environment Programme and the Director of UNEP-Europe;
the Council of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy;
the Secretary-General of the UNECE;
the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency;
the Presidents of the European Investment Bank, the EBRD and the World Bank.
9
Closing remarks
Closing remarks on behalf of REC-Regional
Environmental Center for Central and
Eastern Europe
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe, Szentendre,
Hungary
Clearly there is much for us to do in order to follow up your
recommendations and to keep the momentum alive. However, it is
clear that we must continue to push forward on these issues if we
are to achieve the protection of biodiversity in South-East Europe in
relation to the impacts of climate change and, indeed, all of the other pressures we are currently facing. In
particular, I think that we should look to identify one or two concrete actions, perhaps in the form of
projects, that we can work up and move to delivery as soon as possible. These should deliver quick results,
should be influential in terms of demonstrating that positive results can be achieved and that the policy
framework can provide a basis for moving forward in relation to finding solutions to some of the critical
problems for biodiversity in this region.
I would like to thank you all for your participation and for the excellent outcomes that you have achieved
over the last couple of days. It has been my pleasure to be involved with this conference and I look forward
to increased collaboration and cross-boundary networking as a result of the platform that is being built
here. Finally, I would encourage you all to continue to maintain a dialogue around building increased
knowledge, expertise and, in particular, experience of practical delivery in relation to these issues.
Thank you and goodbye.
Closing remarks on behalf of ECNCEuropean Centre for Nature Conservation
By Rob Wolters, Executive Director ECNC-European Centre for
Nature Conservation
I am truly delighted at the outcomes that we have achieved as a
result of our efforts and hard work. This was a great conference
and we look forward to recording the proceedings in a conference
report that will be made available to all of the delegates and
participants and which will be circulated to the key stakeholders
you have identified and as you requested. All of the country
reports and an excellent overview of the current situation in Europe and specifically South-East Europe
will also be made available in the form of a technical background report.
I am particularly struck by the comments made in relation to keeping the momentum alive. My staff and
I, and our colleagues in the REC will consider it a priority that we work together to identify key projects
and concrete actions that we can take forward as early as possible. The recommendations that you have
generated provide an excellent agenda for action and should provide the basis for an overarching
strategy in dealing with probably the most urgent issue of our times: the fight against climate change
and, in particular, dealing with the impacts on biodiversity.
I thank you all for your participation and your hard work and for the results you have achieved. I
particularly wish to thank our funders, who I am sure must be delighted with the results of this project;
all of our presenters including the Assistant Minister, ministerial representatives, our visiting experts, the
country experts and all those involved in the organization of the conference. I reserve my final thanks for
the participants, without whom this conference would not have been such a resounding success.
Thank you, goodbye and I wish you all the best in your endeavours.
35
Annex 1 Conference programme
DAY 1
Conference Chairman: Rob Wolters, Executive Director ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation
Co-chair: Radoje Laušević, Regional Director REC-Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern
Europe
8.30
Registration
Setting the scene
9.00
Welcome to the conference on behalf of the Spanish Embassy by a Representative of the
Embassy of Spain in Serbia, and opening by Cristina Gutiérrez Hernández, AECID-Agencia
Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (Spanish International Cooperation
9.10
Introduction on behalf of ECNC-European Centre for Nature Conservation and REC-Regional
Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe by Rob Wolters and Radoje Laušević
International, European and regional policy frameworks and actions for
addressing climate change and biodiversity in SEE
9.20
Keynote speech: Biodiversity and climate change policy responses for SEE, by Jelena Cvetkovic,
Assistant Minister, and Minister’s representative, Ministry of Environmental Protection of Serbia
9.40
Convention on Biological Diversity and pan-European policy targets and instruments dealing with
climate change impacts on biodiversity by Ivonne Higuero, United Nations Environment
Programme
10.00
EU policy on climate change impacts on biodiversity by Ana Nieto, ECNC
10.20
Questions and statements from the participants
10.25 – 10.45 Coffee break
Regional impacts and response to climate change on biodiversity and
ecosystem services in SEE
10.45
Climate change impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe and South-East Europe
by Professor Martin Syke, Lund University, Sweden
11.05
Direct impacts of climate change on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and policy response –
examples from the South-East European region
36
11.05
Albania, by Professor Ferdinand Bego, Museum of Natural Sciences
11.25
Bosnia-Herzegovina, by Goran Trbić, University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Natural Science
and Mathematics
11.45
Montenegro, by Mirjana Ivanov, Republic Hydro-meteorological Institute of Montenegro
12.05
Serbia, by Dr. Radoje Laušević, also on behalf of Professor Vladimir Stevanović, Botanical
Institute and Garden, Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade
12.25
Turkey, by Dr Can Bilgin, Middle East Technical University
12.45
12.55
Discussion
Summary of key points from morning sessions
13.00 – 14.30 Lunch
Workshops - Practical solutions and policy tools
Participants will join three groups to address climate change issues at interregional, national and
subnational level. The three workshops will have 1) a chair; and 2) a facilitator/rapporteur.
14.30
Introduction to workshops by Ana Nieto, ECNC
14.45
Work in groups
16.00
Coffee break
17.30
Feedback from the three groups by the rapporteurs, discussion and conclusions
18.00
Closing of the first day
20.00
Conference dinner
DAY 2
Managing the effects of climate change and increasing the resilience of
ecosystems
Co-chair: Radoje Laušević, REC
9.30
Mitigation and adaptation measures to tackle climate change impacts on biodiversity in Europe,
by Boris Erg, IUCN-International Union for Conservation of Nature/Programme Office for South
Eastern Europe
9.50
Mitigation and adaptation measures to tackle climate change impacts on biodiversity in SouthEast Europe, by Andreas Beckmann, WWF International-Danube Carpathian Programme
10.10
Role of ecological networks and resilient ecosystems in tackling climate change, by Claire Vos,
Alterra-Green World Research
10.30 – 10.50 Coffee break
10.50
Managing climate change impacts on biodiversity in protected areas in pan-Europe, including
Natura 2000 sites, by Neil McIntosh, Eurosite
11.10
Impacts, science and adaptation policy: developing adaptation case studies in four contrasting
areas of England, by Keith Buchanan, Natural England, on behalf of Eurosite
11.30
Questions and statements from the participants
Communication
biodiversity
and
public
awareness
on
climate
change
impacts
on
11.50
Public awareness in South-East Europe about climate change impacts on biodiversity, by Radoje
Laušević, REC-Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe
12.10
Improving communication between key stakeholders for addressing the impacts of climate
change on biodiversity, by Dr Lawrence Jones-Walters, ECNC
37
12.30
Discussion
12.50
Summary of key points from morning sessions
13.00 – 14.30 Lunch
Workshops - Identifying solutions to manage and communicate the effects of climate change on
biodiversity
Participants will join three groups that will work towards identifying solutions to manage and
communicate the effects of climate change on biodiversity and to increase the resilience of ecosystems in
SEE. The three workshops will have 1) a chair; and 2) a facilitator/rapporteur.
14.30
Introduction to workshops, by Dr Lawrence Jones-Walters, ECNC
14.40
Workshops in groups
16.00
Coffee break
16.30
Feedback from the groups by the rapporteurs, discussion and conclusions
Keeping the momentum alive
Conference Chairman: Rob Wolters, ECNC
17.30
Overall conclusions and observations, by Radoje Laušević, REC
17.50
The way forward and next steps, by Rob Wolters, ECNC
18.00
Closing of the conference
38
Annex 2 Workshops
The workshop sessions took place in the afternoons on both days. They were organized with the aim of
generating recommendations on addressing climate change impacts on biodiversity at interregional,
national and sub-national level.
On day 1 the participants were asked to join three groups and worked in two sessions towards identifying
the key challenges and actions for climate change and biodiversity in SEE and in identifying the key gaps
in the existing policy and legislation.
On day 2 the participants worked in five groups of four and only one facilitator towards identifying
solutions to manage and communicate the effects of climate change on biodiversity and to increase the
resilience of ecosystems in SEE.
The information that came out of these facilitated sessions is detailed below.
Workshop results
Day 1: Workshops – Practical solutions and policy tools
Session 1: Practical solutions
The aim of this session was to identify which are the key challenges in climate change and biodiversity in
SEE, propose actions to tackle the priority challenges and identify who should carry out those actions. In
doing so the following points were covered:
•
•
•
•
List the key challenges for climate change and biodiversity in SE Europe
Prioritise them.
What action needs to be taken in relation to your top 3-5 priorities?
Who are the key actors/stakeholders that need to take action?
The results of this session are outlined per group below.
Group 1
Key challenges and actions (for priority challenges) for climate change and biodiversity in SEE:
1.
Awareness raising (among the public and politicians), including the requirement to increase public
acceptance and to establish political will.
2. Sustainability of ideas and projects.
3. Lack of a biodiversity monitoring.
4. Lack of data and funding to secure data (analyses and interpretations).
5. Strength of cooperation in SEE, including regional and international cooperation.
6. Lack of institutional networks.
7. Lack of an adaptation strategy.
8. Lack of research programmes.
9. Lack of community programmes.
10. Conflict between economic development and resilience, including new land-use practices,
sustainable consumption and production (implemented), and need per se for economic
development.
11. Lack of integration of biodiversity into other sectors.
12. Lack of proper planning, financial and human resources.
Priority challenges
Awareness, public and political will
Actions
Change curricula
By who
Governments (ministries)
Training for policymakers
NGOs (International)
Production of promotional material
Governments and NGOs
39
Producing credible evidence
Communication programme
Establish lobbies/national
panel and/or group
Lack of planning and management of
resources (human and financial)
Policymakers, NGOs
biodiversity
Website (information exchange, regional
fora)
Institutional information network
Research programme
Monitoring and assessment
Strategic action programme
Training programmes
Sustainable development
Law on human resource management
Training business sector
Introduction of climate change and
biodiversity into extension services
Consideration of climate change and
biodiversity in development plans
Re-planning transport in cities
Development of adaptation strategy on
climate change and biodiversity
Sustainable tourism development plan
Revision of curricula (high schools and
universities)
NGOs, experts
Universities,
municipalities,
international organizations
Governments
and
research
institutes
Governments
and
research
institutes
Governments
and
research
institutes
Governments,
international
development agencies
Politicians, scientific institutes,
NGOs
Governments
Businesses
and
scientific
institutes
Government agencies
Government
agencies,
governments
Local governments
Governments and NGOs
local
Local
communities,
NGOs,
governments
Governments,
scientific
institutes, universities
Group 2
Key challenges for climate change and biodiversity in SEE:
1.
2.
Industrial pollution (soil, water, land).
Inappropriate country management of land resources - lack of strategies, policies, strategic
documents.
3. Lack of sustainable protected area management.
4. Lack of awareness about climate changes and their consequences, including social and economic
aspects.
5. Lack of capacity (expertise).
6. Improvement of regional cross-border cooperation.
7. Lack of data.
8. Lack of cooperation and coordination among stakeholders.
9. Insufficient legislation and enforcement.
10. Increasing urbanization and overpopulation in coastal areas.
11. The focus of the government on energy and tourism issues.
Key actions for climate change and biodiversity in SEE:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Innovative incentives for better resource management.
Bringing economics into biodiversity protection (awareness of economic biodiversity - costs and
benefits).
Establishment of regional bodies, expert networks.
Awareness-raising campaigns towards decision makers providing scientific facts (e.g. erosion of
soil).
Key stakeholders involved in the development of the actions:
1.
40
Decision makers.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Expert bodies - academic, University organizations.
Opinion leaders.
Civil society organizations (environmental, grass-root organizations and other NGOs).
Business sector.
Local authorities.
Group 3
Key challenges and actions (for priority challenges) for climate change and biodiversity in SEE:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Gap analysis by increased research on modelling and on monitoring.
Clear policy and strategic framework for addressing climate change and biodiversity.
Lack of in-country capacity at all levels.
Insufficient regional cooperation.
Estimating to what extent climate change is a threat to biodiversity in general in order to shape
the management of protected areas and the ecological network.
6. Increase the percentage of protected areas.
7. Integration of climate change in sectoral policies and economic and financial sectors.
8. Awareness-raising activities also at subnational level.
9. Poor cooperation between institutions (vertical and horizontal).
10. Better implementation and synergy of international conventions related to climate change and
biodiversity.
Priority challenges
1. Gap analysis of the existing data and
increase of research work in relation to
modelling and monitoring
2. Clear policy and strategic approach
addressing
climate
change
and
biodiversity issues
3. Improve the in-country capacity at all
levels and increased institutional and
regional cooperation.
4. Education and public awareness of
climate change and biodiversity.
5. Proper management of the ecological
network in regard to the impact of climate
change.
Action
Data collecting.
Better research.
Undertake impact assessment studies
Review and evaluation of existing
knowledge.
Privatization of existing gaps.
Establish a programme of monitoring
based on international standards.
Use of persuasive models (from
existing set of models).
Utilize monitoring and indicators for
improving national policies and legal
framework
Establish national strategies to climate
change and biodiversity
Incorporate the climate change and
biodiversity
issues
into
sectoral
strategies and policies
Establish most effective structure
policy delivery.
Increase
resources
(human
and
financial).
Strengthening the cooperation among
relevant sectors and stakeholders.
Active networking on a regional
context.
Establish biannual regional conference
on climate change and biodiversity in
SEE.
Establish a national and regional
communication strategy.
Include
climate
change
and
biodiversity knowledge in the school
curriculum.
Media capacity building.
Community involvement.
Establish a new management plan
according to the data newly collected.
Prioritize the most affected areas
including bottlenecks connectivity.
Establish ecological networks in the
region.
By who
Scientific institutions
Researchers
Monitoring agencies
EEA
National environmental
agencies
Governments
Donors
Governments
Scientific institutions
Implementing agencies
Parliaments
Sectoral impact stakeholders
Donors
Governments
NGOs
Media
Sectoral impact stakeholders
Donors
Governments
NGOs
Media
Governments
Local communities
State institutes
NGOs
Science and research institutes
Donors
41
Session 2: Policy and legislation
The aim of this session was to list the most important gaps in knowledge and data on the impacts of
climate change on biodiversity that are needed to support the policy process and to identify which are the
changes/additions to the current legislation that are appropriate/required in relation to changing climate.
It was also discussed which biodiversity indicators are needed to establish the impact of climate change
and to establish the effectiveness of policy. In doing so the following points were covered:
•
•
•
•
List the most important gaps in knowledge and data on the impacts of climate change on biodiversity
that are needed to support the policy process?
What changes/additions to the current legislation are appropriate/ required in relation to changing
climate?
What biodiversity indicators do we need/have already to:
1. establish the impact of climate change?
2. establish the effectiveness of policy?
What role do local authorities play in tackling climate change?
The results of this session are outlined below.
Group 1
Most important gaps in knowledge and data on the impacts on biodiversity needed to support the policy
process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Lack of awareness and understanding regarding social, economic consequences of climate change
and biodiversity loss.
How can we prove climate change impacts on biodiversity?
Spreading information is as important as having it.
Lack of legislation/policy specifically on adaptation, climate change and biodiversity.
Lack of consolidated data - need time sequence, and geographic coverage.
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
Coordination and cooperation.
Lack of information and data about the Mediterranean Sea:
•
•
•
•
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
trends in temperature
sea currents
dissolved oxygen
algal blooms.
No long-term data on climate trends and their impacts on hotspots and species.
Lack of a biodiversity monitoring network.
Lack of data on species phenology change.
Lack of access to the existing data.
Lack of long-term data to analyse and interpret.
Lack of a standardized monitoring data.
Lack of list of species and habitats most vulnerable to climate change.
Changes/additions to the current legislation that are required in relation to climate change:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Incorporate climate change as a cross-cutting issue into other sectoral legislation during the
planning and development process.
Amend or improve current laws as part of EU legislation approximation/adaptation process.
SEAs/EIAs in industrial sector and physical planning to take into consideration climate change.
Incorporate climate change considerations in tourism development along the coast.
Biodiversity indicators that are needed to establish the impact of climate change and to establish the
effectiveness of policy:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
42
Phenology of indicator species.
Migratory birds (and nesting).
Population trends and distribution range of selected species (butterflies, birds).
Habitat fragmentation and connectivity along the coast and mountain areas.
List of vulnerable/indicator species.
6. Established sites to monitor climate changes (inside protected areas).
Day 2: Workshops – Identifying solutions to manage and communicate the
effects of climate change on biodiversity
On the second day, the participants worked towards identifying solutions to manage and communicate
the effects of climate change on biodiversity and to increase the resilience of ecosystems in SEE.
Session 1: Adaptation and mitigation
The aim of the first session was to list the main methods for adapting ecosystems and biodiversity to
climate change, to prioritize them and to add activities to implement these priority methods. In doing so
the following points were covered:
•
•
•
List the main methods for adapting ecosystems and biodiversity to climate change in SEE?
Prioritise them
What do we need to do to implement the priorities?
The results of this session are outlined below.
Adaptation and mitigation: methods
1. Increase protected areas.
2. Improve management of protected areas with new techniques.
3. Develop an indication strategy for awareness about climate change and biodiversity (plus education).
4. Encourage suitable land-use practices especially in relation to agriculture and forestry.
5. Preserve existing nature values.
6. Integrate values into sectors.
7. Habitat restoration.
8. Establish a multi-stakeholder network for climate change and biodiversity.
9. Risk assessment.
10. Identify species and ecosystems most vulnerable to climate change.
11. Reconsider aliens and natives and strategy towards them.
12. Stepping stones and bio-corridors.
13. Relocations and reintroduction.
14. The flagship species and targeted funding.
Priority methods (from
above list)
Increase protected
areas
Improve management
of protected areas
Develop
communications
strategy
Habitat restoration
Actions
Raise awareness: central and local government (local government how to implement it);
local users (they have to accept it).
Improved mitigation with stakeholders – develop a dialogue (including stepping stones and
connectivity).
Promote protected areas roles and functions.
Building capacity: knowledge and funding.
Improve designation proceedings.
Build an ownership.
Involve stakeholders earlier in the process.
Develop new spatial plan for designated areas.
Prepare a new management plan.
Implement the plan: introduce new methods (e.g. sustainable tourism/organic
farming/locally independent farming); involve local population in management and
development planning; training and capacity building for managers themselves.
Get together with stakeholders.
Establish working team.
Budget allocation.
Define target groups.
Consider comparative experiences.
Develop proper strategy.
Implementation (include special agencies if necessary).
Motivate and involve celebrities.
Possible methods to influence target group (talkshows, publications, TV, etc.)
Identify/prioritize areas for restoration: take into account present and future ecological
43
Identify most
vulnerable species and
ecosystems
networks; focus on ecosystem functions; feasibility – cost/land ownership; involve relevant
stakeholders.
Prepare a project proposal.
Implement it: involve relevant stakeholders.
Establish expert group: develop/decide on regional climate model; identify sensitive
species/species groups and ecosystems (based on vulnerability to climate change, current
threatened status, economic importance, etc.); prioritize; way to integrate outcomes into
current policy/decision-making process. Identify most vulnerable species and ecosystems.
Session 2: Communication; stakeholders/messages/medium
In session two, every group had to list messages for a specific group of stakeholders. Additionally, the
best medium for this message to these stakeholders had to be identified. In doing so the following points
were covered:
•
•
•
Which means of information exchange will work best in SEE?
How should they be set up? (e.g. networks, website, discussion forums, etc.)
How can they be sustained in the long term?
The results of this session are listed in the following table.
Stakeholder
Policymakers: ministries
at EU level
Press and media
Message
You need to be worried about this!
You need it for your directives.
You need it for your integration.
You must act.
It's in the public interest.
The economy depends on it.
Take action because it will benefit you financially.
Inaction will cost you (the cost of inaction e.g.
flooding).
Will we be climate change refugees?
Nature is dying – we are part of it!
Be prepared for escape!
Noah's Ark needed!
Land managers: small
farmers who irrigate
their land
Short film: about water usage and climate change –
start of desertification; alternative future; people
talking about benefits (talking heads).
Public: villagers
Be proud to live in the countryside: issue – you are rich
by living close to nature; the opportunity; linked to
urban areas. Protect nature. Protect past and future
44
Medium
Evidence of public interest
(Financial Times and all relevant
regional newspapers).
Face-to-face.
Succinct policy paper with key
quantified examples.
International seminar (on
climate change adaptation) –
perhaps funded by UNEP?
Training seminars of the
journalists.
Study visits to protected areas
and/or devastated areas (fires;
coastal; etc.).
Press conference with celebrities
(e.g. Sting).
Competition for journalists; best
climate-responsible journalist.
Local TV channels.
The 30-second sound bite.
Frightening future of farmers.
Call free hotline giving them and
telling them opportunities.
TV.
Radio.
Face-to-face meetings.
Children – education.
Annex 3 Participants list
Country
Name
Function
Organization
Albania
Mr Zamir Dedej
President
Institute of Nature Conservation in
Albania - INCA
Albania
Mr Nazmi Xhomara
Head of Training
Zyra Arsimore Mat/Educational
Office of Mat
Albania
Mr Eduart Cani
Senior Project Manager
REC Office, Albania
Albania
Prof. Ferdinand Bego
Researcher
Tirana University
Museum of Natural Sciences
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Mr Borislav Jakšić
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Mr Djordje Vojinovic
Project Manager
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Mr Goran Trbić
Advisor / Director
Germany
Ms Kuenda Laze
Visiting Researcher
University of Banja Luka
Regional Environmental Centre for
Central and Eastern Europe
Country Office Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Field Office Banjaluka
Hydrometeorological Service;
University of Banja Luka, Faculty of
Natural Science and Mathematics
Leibniz Institute of Agricultural
Development in Central and Eastern
Europe (IAMO)
International
Dr Radoje Laušević
Regional director for SEE
REC-Regional Environmental Centre
for Central and Eastern Europe
International
Mr Andreas Beckmann
Deputy Director
WWF Danube-Carpathian
Programme
International
Mr Deni Porej
Director of Programs
WWF Mediterranean Programme
Office
International
Mr Boris Erg
International
Ms Ivonne Higuero
Project Coordinator
Ecosystems Management and
Biodiversity sub programme
Coordinator
International
Mr Neil McIntosh
Deputy Director
Eurosite
International
Mr Rob Wolters
Executive Director
ECNC–European Centre for Nature
Conservation
International
Ms Ana Nieto
International
Dr Lawrence JonesWalters
Project Manager
Senior Programme Manager Biodiversity and Ecological
Networks
International
Ms Hanneke Wijnja
Communication Officer
Conservation
International
Dr Daniel Cebrian
Menchero
SAP BIO Programme Officer
UNEP MAP Regional Activity Centre
for Specially Protected Areas
Montenegro
Mr Ljubisa Perovic
Director
Office for Sustainable Development
IUCN - the International Union for
Conservation of Nature
UNEP Regional Office for Europe
Conservation
Conservation
45
Country
Name
Function
Organization
Montenegro
Mr Nebojsa Jablan
Engineer
Electric Power Company of
Montenegro
Montenegro
Ms Srna Jelena Sudar
Vilotic
Director
REC Country Office Montenegro
Montenegro
Ms Bojana Perović
Project Coordinator
Greens of Montenegro
Montenegro
Ms Mirjana Ivanov
Head of Meteorological
Department
Hydrometeorological Institute of
Montenegro
Serbia
Mr Milan Dacic
Director
Republic Hydrometeorological
Service of Serbia
Serbia
Mr Jovan Pavlovic
Acting Director
REC Country Office, Serbia
Serbia
Ms Snezana Prokic
Advisor
Ministry of Environmental Protection
Serbia
Mr Aleksandar Mijovic
Advisor
Serbian Environment Protection
Agency
Serbia
Ms Milka Gvozdenovic
Coordinator for Environmental
Projects
Young Researchers of Serbia
Serbia
Mr Dejan Zagorac
President of Executive Council
Eko centar
Serbia
Mrs Danica Spasova
Director Advisor
Service of Serbia
Serbia
Mr Petar Spasov
Serbia
Mrs Miljana Čolić Zekonja
Serbia
Mr Vedran Berlekovic
Serbia
Ms Olga Vlahovic
Junior Advisor
Serbia
Mr Miroslav Tadic
Advisor
Serbia
Ms Marija Stefanovic
Junior Advisor
Serbia
Mr Milutin Pantovic
Advisor
Serbia
Ms Jelena Cvetkovic
Assistant Minister
Serbia
Mr Dusan Pajkic
Assistant Minister
Serbia
Ms Dragana Bojovic
Volunteer
Serbia
Prof. Vladimir Stevanović
Head of Department of Plant
Ecology and Phytogeography
Endemit
Botanical Institute and Garden
Faculty of Biology
University of Belgrade
46
Service of Serbia
Project Manager
Advisor
REC Office, Serbia
Country
Name
Function
Organization
Serbia
Ms Duska Dimovic
Coordinator for International
Cooperation
Institute for Nature Conservation of
Serbia
Serbia
Ms Danijela Bozanic
Head of Climate Change Office
Serbia
Ms Biljana Macura
Project Coordinator
Society for Ecology - Endemit
Spain
Mr Pablo Ruperéz
Counsellor
Spain
Ms Cristina Gutiérrez
Hernández
General Coordinator
Spain
Ms Nuria Sáenz-Lopez
Pérez
Sweden
Prof. Martin Sykes
Junior Project Manager
Professor, Dept. of Physical
Geography & Ecosystems
Analysis
Spanish Embassy in Belgrade
AECID, Spanish International
Cooperation Agency for
Development
AECID, Spanish International
Cooperation Agency for
Development
The
Netherlands
Ms Claire Vos
Senior Scientist
Alterra
Turkey
Dr Serap Yilmaz
Veterinary Expert
Ministry of Environment and Forestry
Turkey
Mr Adem Ağir
Engineer
Ministry of Environment and Forestry
Turkey
Ms Ceren Uzel Gürbüz
Board Member
TÜRÇEK
Turkey
Dr Cernal Can Bilgin
Associate Professor
Middle East Technical University
Biology Department
Turkey
Ms Yesim Caglayan
Project Manager
REC Country Office, Turkey
United
Kingdom
Mr Keith Buchanan
Major Project Manager,
Climate Change
Natural England
University of Lund
47
ISBN: 978-90-76762-24-1
www.ecnc.org

Changing climate, changing biodiversity in South-East Europe

Transcription

Similar documents

BIO-C3 - Bonus

PowerPoint presentation

Presentation_COLOMBIA

Integrating Traditional Crop Genetic Diversity for Mountain Food

Good-bye poverty, hello biodiversity

Book of Abstracts - Water is Life The Local Approach

Establishment of Three Model Bioparks for Promoting

Papua`s Foja Mountains - Library

EUR 22550 EN

SDT 418 - El Departamento de Economía de la Universidad de Chile