Defining and applying the concept of Favourable Reference Values for species habitats under the EU Birds and Habitats Directives : examples of setting favourable reference values
Bijlsma, R.J. ; Agrillo, E. ; Attorre, F. ; Boitani, L. ; Brunner, A. ; Evans, P. ; Foppen, R. ; Gubbay, S. ; Janssen, J.A.M. ; Kleunen, A. van; Langhout, W. ; Pacifici, M. ; Ramirez, I. ; Rondinini, C. ; Roomen, M. van; Siepel, H. ; Swaaij, C.A.M. van; Winter, H.V. - \ 2019
Wageningen : Wageningen Environmental Research (Wageningen Environmental Research report 2929) - 219
Defining and applying the concept of Favourable Reference Values for species habitats under the EU Birds and Habitats Directives : technical report
Bijlsma, R.J. ; Agrillo, E. ; Attorre, F. ; Boitani, L. ; Brunner, A. ; Evans, P. ; Foppen, R. ; Gubbay, S. ; Janssen, J.A.M. ; Kleunen, A. van; Langhout, W. ; Noordhuis, R. ; Pacifici, M. ; Ramirez, I. ; Rondinini, C. ; Roomen, M. van; Siepel, H. ; Winter, H.V. - \ 2019
Wageningen : Wageningen Environmental Research (Wageningen Environmental Research report 2928) - 93
|The European Red List of Terrestrial and Freshwater habitats
Rodwell, J. ; Janssen, J.A.M. ; Garcia Criado, M. ; Gubbay, S. ; Haynes, T. ; Nieto, A. ; Sanders, Natalie - \ 2017
In: The 60th IAVS annual symposium, MA Vegetation patterns in natural and cultural landscapes. - Palermo : Palermo University Press - ISBN 9788899934408
The European Red List of Habitats presents the first comprehensive and systematic assessment of the threat level of all terrestrial and freshwater habitats across Europe. Funded by the European Commission, the project was a collaboration of over 150 experts across the EU28 plus Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and the Balkans. Using a typology based on the EUNIS habitat classification at level 3 (crosswalked to the alliances of the EuroVegChecklist) and a modified version of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems assessment methodology, it provides information on 228 habitats (233 in EU28+) including habitat definition, images, distribution, trends in quantity and quality over the past 50 years, long-term and future trends, pressures and threats, conservation measures, data sources and supporting literature. Assessment revealed that 36% of the habitats (31% for the EU28+) were in the three top IUCN threat categories of Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable across Europe as whole. Most generally threatened were mires, grasslands, freshwaters and coastal habitats. Forest, heaths & scrubs and sparsely vegetated habitats were generally less threatened but often still of ongoing concern. Reasons for decline in extent and quality were numerous but most important overall were intensification of agriculture, abandonment, drainage and pollution, invasion of alien plants and animals, urbanisation and associated infrastructure development. This paper will provide details of the assessment methodology and results, outline applications of the work and indicate the online availability of project deliverables: the European Red List of Habitats report and powerpoint; and for every habitat a pdf fact-sheet, images, GIS distribution maps and full territorial data. A parallel Red List assessment has been carried out for 257 European marine habitats in the Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Seas and the North-East Atlantic.
European red list of habitats. Part 1: Marine habitats
Gubbay, S. ; Sanders, N. ; Haynes, T. ; Janssen, J.A.M. ; Rodwell, J.R. ; Nieto, A. ; Garcia Criado, M. ; Beal, S. ; Borg, J. - \ 2016
European Union - ISBN 9789279615863 - 52 p.
The European Red List of Habitats provides an overview of the risk
of collapse (degree of endangerment) of marine, terrestrial and
freshwater habitats in the European Union (EU28) and adjacent
regions (EU28+), based on a consistent set of categories and
criteria, and detailed data and expert knowledge from involved
countries1. A total of 257 benthic marine habitat types were
assessed. In total, 19% (EU28) and 18% (EU28+) of the evaluated
habitats were assessed as threatened in categories Critically
Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable. An additional 12% were
Near Threatened in the EU28 and 11% in the EU28+. These figures
are approximately doubled if Data Deficient habitats are excluded.
The percentage of threatened habitat types differs across the
regional seas. The highest proportion of threatened habitats in
the EU28 was found in the Mediterranean Sea (32%), followed by
the North-East Atlantic (23%), the Black Sea (13%) and then the
Baltic Sea (8%). There was a similar pattern in the EU28+.
The most frequently cited pressures and threats were similar
across the four regional seas: pollution (eutrophication), biological
resource use other than agriculture or forestry (mainly fishing but
also aquaculture), natural system modifications (e.g. dredging and
sea defence works), urbanisation and climate change. Even for
habitats where the assessment outcome was Data Deficient, the
Red List assessment process has resulted in the compilation of a
substantial body of useful information to support the conservation
of marine habitats
|Red list of European Habitats Project
Janssen, J.A.M. ; Rodwell, J. ; Nieto, A. ; Gubbay, S. ; Haynes, T. ; Nabuurs, G.J. ; Schaminee, J.H.J. - \ 2014
In: Book of abstracts of 23rd Annual Meeting of European Vegetation Survey EVS. - Ljubljana : ZRC Publishing House - p. 220 - 220.
Under contract from the European Commission, DG Environment, a project is being carried out for assessing the Red List status of European terrestrial and marine (semi)natural habitats. The geographical scope of the project is the EU28 and Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and the Balkan countries for terrestrial habitats and the EEZs and territorial waters for marine habitats. The main product is a fact sheet on which information on a habitat type is given, including the Red List status. The project is co-ordinated by a consortium of Alterra, IUCN, NatureBureau, John Rodwell ecologist and Susan Gubbay marine ecologist, while more than 50 subcontractors from different countries are co-operating as subcontractors. For the typology the EUNIS level 3 is the basis for terrestrial habitats. It will be adapted where EUNIS-types overlap, are very broad in their definitions or where splitting corresponds better with HD Annex I habitat types. For marine habitats EUNIS level 4 habitats are the basis. The result is a red list typology for this project. The project works with thematic Working Groups for terrestrial habitats (coastal, freshwater, mires/bogs/fens, heathlands/shrubs/tundra, grasslands, forests, rocks/screes) and regional working groups for marine habitats (Northsea/Atlantic, Baltic, Mediterranean, Black Sea). The experts in these terrestrial working groups will be provided with national data on status and trends in habitat types, from territorial experts. The working groups will prepare a draft fact sheet and assessment for each red list type, which will be reviewed in a later stage, in order to guarantee consistency between assessments. The criteria will cover negative trends in quantity, negative trends in quality and small distribution ranges in combination with threats and negative trends. The project will end in spring 2016. During the EVS-workshop an example of an assessment of a habitat type will be presented.
Red list assessment of European habitat types. A feasibility study
Rodwell, J.S. ; Janssen, J.A.M. ; Gubbay, S. ; Schaminee, J.H.J. - \ 2013
European Commission DG Environment - 78
habitats - biodiversiteit - flora - bedreigde soorten - classificatie - europese unie - biodiversity - endangered species - classification - european union
This report presents an achievable methodology for the Red List assessment of European habitats in terrestrial, freshwater and marine realms, outlines a process that will deliver such evaluations and gives an indication of resources needed. It shows how the EUNIS habitat classification can be employed as an assessment typology, recommends criteria for quantity and quality, assessment of the past trend and current state, and advises including supplementary information on drivers, threats and restorability. The report recommends thresholds and assessment categories that are fully compatible with developing IUCN proposals. As a basis for its recommendations, the report reviews the kinds of typology that are used for habitat description – classifications based on fine-scale species assemblages, mid-scale habitat/biotope classifications and broad-scale ecosystem typologies. It reviews how far each typology has been used for Red List assessment and discusses the various scales on which such evaluations have been made. Relationships between these typologies and classifications used in the Habitats Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive are discussed. The report then outlines the core criteria and the thresholds that have been used so far for Red List assessment: quantity (Area of Occupancy, Extent of Occurrence, dispersal/fragmentation, endemism and stand size), quality (speciesrichness, presence of rare, threatened or endemic species, structure, function & landscape context) and trends (in both quantity and quality, both back in time and forwards). It also considers various supplementary criteria that have been used for some Red List assessments: scales of naturalness/hemeroby, drivers and threats, degrees of resilience and restoration capacity. Actual Red List evaluation processes are then described, in the developing IUCN programme for ecosystems and among other approaches, and the role of expert judgment and peer review in assessment is discussed. There is then a critical review of the assessment categories employed for Red Listing: extinct (completely destroyed, extirpated), critically endangered (immediately threatened, severely declined), endangered (threatened, significantly declined), vulnerable (potentially endangered), least concern (secure, not endangered), increasing and data-deficient. The report outlines some of the major data sources available to inform expert judgement: vegetation plot data for terrestrial and freshwater habitats, the Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe, other terrestrial maps, marine data sources and the Article 17 reporting database. It then outlines relationships between Red List assessment and ecosystem services. The report provides an assessment Fact Sheet and provides two Case Studies which outline available data, deficiencies of information and feasibility of assessment. Finally, there is a comprehensive bibliography of all references.