Prioritised Action Frameworks (PAFs) for Natura 2000

Transcription

1 Prioritised Action Frameworks (PAFs) for Natura 2000 Progress and state of play Thematic Platfrom Meeting on PAF projects Brussels, 5 November 2013

2 PAF: state of play PAFs received from 23 MS (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IE, IT, LV, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, SK, SL, UK); Assessment and quality check by Nature Unit: Completeness; Up-to-date; Part F and G the most important; Level of detail sufficient for the OPs; Follow-up with other DGs: Summaries; Trainings; ISC for PAs and OPs.

3 PAF: follow-up with EC services DG ENV B.3 Nature D.1 Cohesion Policy B.1 Agricultural Policy C.2 Marine Policy E.3 LIFE Nature DG REGIO DG AGRI DG MARE ERDF CF EAFRD EMFF

4 PAF: follow-up with MS Position Papers Sent to all the MS Natura 2000 and PAFs (mostly) recognised Partnership Agreements DG REGIO in the lead Negotiations on-going Operational Programmes For all the CSF funds Ideally, reference to the PAF

5 PAFs and MFF regulations Common Provisions Regulation: Art. 8 on sustainable development MS and the Commission shall ensure that environmental protection requirements [ ] biodiversity and ecosystem protection, [ ] are promoted in the preparation and implementation of Partnership Agreements and programmes. EAFRD: Art. 5 - priorities: restoring and preserving biodiversity including Natura 2000 Art. 9 RDPs: pertinent approach towards the environment, including the specific needs of Natura 2000 areas CF/ERDF: Art. 5 - priorities: protecting and restoring biodiversity and restoration and promoting ecosystem services including Natura 2000 and green infrastructures EMFF: Art. 38, 42, 54 priorities: ecosystem protection in the context of fisheries and acquculture Art. 20 OPs: pertinent approach to Natura 2000 Annex: MS shall promote and [ ] ensure complementarity and coordination with LIFE, in particular with integrated projects LIFE: Art. 11: objectives of biodiversity component - support development, implementation and management of N2000 and implementation of the PAFs

6 PAFs and integrated projects Integrated projects: Implementation of plans, programmes or strategies required by EU environmental or climate legislation; Larger scale, e.g., regional, multiregional, national; Primarily in the areas of nature, water, waste, air, climate mitigation and adaptation; They are inclusive: stakeholders must be involved as associated beneficiaries; Sustainability will be important as well as mobilisation of other funds (EU or other);

7 Prioritised Action Frameworks - overview A. Introductory overview of Natura 2000 B. Status of the habitats and species: - prefilled by COM & MS updated and developed information C. Legal & administrative provisions - progress with management planning & conservation objectives - info on relevant plans and initiatives: D. Current experience use of EU funds: - different level of detail so difficult to aggregate data - valuable comments under 'lessons learnt and obstacles encountered' E. Estimate of financial needs - figures from 2008 or updated - different approach - break-down of costs vs. general categories; - cost estimates sometimes presented separately for sectors

8 Prioritised Action Frameworks - overview F. Conservation priorities for : - thorough analysis of priorities (e.g. based on conservation status) vs. maximalistic approach (shopping lists) - measurable and quantifiable targets vs. general targets - national priorities (e.g. based on national red lists) vs. European priorities (habitats and species for which the MS have particular EU responsibility) - in many cases lack of clear prioritisation or important gaps (e.g. birds) G. Conservation measures: - detailed vs. general; specific habitats and species vs. generic (forests, grasslands, marine sites etc.); MS level vs. regional level; fund specific vs. funds unspecified; - in some cases serious efforts to look for synergies with climate and growth and jobs agenda but mostly "business as usual" nature conservation

9 PAF overview - conclusions PAFs prepared for the 1st time; Different quality: most are complete and acceptable but some miss key information; Better prioritisation would be useful; The same for clearer targets for 2020; Conservation as a driver for wider socio-economic benefits generally analysis missing.

10 Contract 1. Updated Handbook 2.Toolkit 3. Seminars in MS

11 Additional information

12 Contact: Przemyslaw. For more information, please consult: