A preliminary list of EU research projects in the area of biodiversity for the KNOSSOS project Approach

Starting point was the list of projects under the 6th and 7th Framework Programmes (FP6 and FP7) provided on the European Commission Research & Innovation Environment website (http://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/index_en.cfm). Here, the research area of biodiversity was selected. As other, slightly differing versions of the FP6 and FP7 projects were also available, projects listed there under biodiversity but under other research areas on the website were taken into account as well. A total of 51 projects, 35 from FP6 and 16 from FP7, were assessed. Five projects (4 of FP6 and one of FP7) without an accessible web presentation were dropped from the selection process altogether as it seemed impossible to obtain sufficient information on the project. The criteria developed for KNOSSOS were applied, with allocating a score of 1 (poor), 2 (average) or 3 (fully satisfying) for each criterion and project. The scores were then added up. 14 projects (7 of FP6 and 7 of FP7) reached scores of 24, 25 or 26 (with a potential maximum score of 30). Subsequently, an additional criterion - the availability of project reports and/or publications - was applied to these 14 projects. This resulted in dropping one project which has only just started so no reports or results are available yet. Subsequently, following discussions with the UNEP project manager, four additional projects (that had not made the first priority list; it includes one of the projects that were initially dropped due to lack of sufficient information) were also selected as they were deemed as directly relevant to KNOSSOS.

The selected projects

The following 17 projects were selected: FP6: BASIN, BIOSCORE, DAISIE, EUMON, EUR-OCEANS, EURO-LIMPACS, GLOCHAMORE, HERMES, MACIS, MODELKEY and RUBICODE. FP7: HighARCS, HUNT, LiveDiverse, SCALES, SOILSERVICE and STEP. Please see Annex I for details of these projects (with an emphasis on policy relevance) and Annex II for the scoring of the projects against the criteria (with two tables for the FP6 and FP7 projects). Input on

the project details in Annex I from project leaders was provided for some of the FP7 projects after the European Commission facilitated contact with project leaders for these projects.

The criteria
The criteria as developed for KNOSSOS were in general found useful. However, some revisions would be recommended from the experience gained with applying the criteria. Please see Annex III for a suggested revised set of criteria.

This report was produced by UNEP-WCMC for UNEP for the KNOwledge from Science to SOcietieS (KNOSSOS) project. It was drafted by Peter Herkenrath and Siobhan Kenney and finalised on February 28th, 2011. 2

Contents
Approach ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 The selected projects .................................................................................................................................... 1 The criteria .................................................................................................................................................... 2 ANNEX I: The selected projects ..................................................................................................................... 4 BASIN......................................................................................................................................................... 4 BIOSCORE .................................................................................................................................................. 5 DAISIE ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 EUMON ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 EUR-OCEANS ............................................................................................................................................. 9 EURO-LIMPACS ....................................................................................................................................... 11 GLOCHAMORE......................................................................................................................................... 13 HERMES................................................................................................................................................... 14 HighARCS................................................................................................................................................. 16 HUNT ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 LiveDiverse .............................................................................................................................................. 19 MACIS ...................................................................................................................................................... 20 MODELKEY .............................................................................................................................................. 22 RUBICODE ............................................................................................................................................... 23 SCALES ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 SOILSERVICE ............................................................................................................................................ 28 STEP......................................................................................................................................................... 29 Annex II: Screening of FP6 and FP7 projects ............................................................................................... 32 Table 1: FP6 projects ............................................................................................................................... 32 Table 2: FP7 projects ............................................................................................................................... 36 Annex III: Revision of the criteria ................................................................................................................ 38

ANNEX I: The selected projects BASIN

Long Title: Basin-scale Analysis, Synthesis, and Integration: Resolving the impact of climatic processes on ecosystems of the North Atlantic Basin and shelf seas Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.uni-hamburg.de/ihf/Basin.html and http://www.globec.org/index.php?id=250 Coordination: Hamburg University Duration: 1.5 years from 2006 Short Summary Assessed the state of research on the impact of climatic processes on North Atlantic ecosystems and developed a research programme, to be taken up by FP7. European and North American remit. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Held four workshops that led to the development of a pan-Atlantic science plan on the impact of global change to ecosystem processes. Production of four reports on: o The status of climate-related ecosystem research in the North Atlantic Basin and associated shelf seas. o The identification and documentation of gaps in observations and the process of understanding atmospheric and oceanic parameters. o The identification of potential for consolidation of long-term observations from US and international databases for the modeling and prediction of the dynamics of North Atlantic. o Provide a science plan upon which future research programmes in the region can be based. Relevance for Green Economy Positive impacts of BASIN on a green economy, through, for example, a better understanding and taking into account of ecosystem services provided by North Atlantic Basin and shelf seas ecosystems, can be expected in the long-term future, after the future research programmes that BASIN envisages through its science plan will be implemented. Reports GLOBEC Report No. 23: BASIN: Basin-scale Analysis, Synthesis, and Integration GLOBEC Report No.27: BASIN: Basin-Scale Analysis, Synthesis and Integration. Science Plan and Implementation Strategy Report of the first BASIN Scientific Support Action meeting Report of the second BASIN Scientific Support Action meeting

Key Publications None known

BIOSCORE
Long Title: Biodiversity Impact Assessment Using Species Sensitivity Scores Framework Programme: FP6 Website: www.bioscore.eu Coordination: European Centre for Nature Conservation (ECNC) Duration: 3 years from 2006 Short Summary A database with ecological preferences of 1,000 species (vertebrates, invertebrates, vascular plants) in relation to pressures was developed in order to assess the impact of EU policies on these species and to analyse the effectiveness of EU policy responses. Subsequently, model scenarios for selected drivers were established allowing for integration of the tool into existing monitoring frameworks. Case studies were undertaken on afforestation, air and water quality, and biofuel production. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Built a European database with the ecological preferences of individual species in relation to pressures and selected EU policies. Development of a cost-effective tool for monitoring and assessment of the impacts of key drivers and pressures from EU policies on biodiversity (species). The tool is available to download online. Applied the tool for assessing the impacts of EU policies on biodiversity, the effectiveness of European policy responses and for modelling European-wide scenarios for selected drivers. Three case studies tested the usefulness and predictive power of the tool two of which were retrospective and their results were compared with historical data of biodiversity change. Results showed a good correspondence between the expected and observed changes. Analysed how the tool can be integrated with biodiversity monitoring frameworks. Proposed incentives for wider uptake of the tool. Relevance for Green Economy The tool that BIOSCORE developed enables a better understanding of the impacts of EU policies on key species, thus it helps to review these policies, with their economic impacts, and to make them greener, taking ecosystem services better into account. Reports BioScore Final Report Annexes to report BioScore list of selected policy sectors and pressures 5

Key Publications Delbaere, B. 2006. European Policy Review: assessing policy impacts on biodiversity. J. Nat. Conserv. 14(2): 129-130. Delbaere, B. 2009. Hoe benvloedt Europees beleid de Europese vlinders? Vlinders 2/09: 22-23. Eggers J., Trltzsch, K., Falcucci, A., Maiorano, L., Verburg, P.H., Framstad, E., Louette, G., Maes, D., Nagy, S., Ozinga, W. & Delbaere, B. 2009. Is biofuel policy harming biodiversity in Europe? Global Change Biology Bioenergy 1: 18-34. Louette G., Maes, D., Alkemade, J.R.M., Boitani, L., de Knegt, B., Eggers, J., Falcucci, A., Framstad, E., Hagemeijer, W., Hennekens, S.M., Maiorano, L., Nagy, S., Nieto Serradilla, A., Ozinga, W.A., Schamine, J.H.J., Tsiaousi, V., van Tol, S. & Delbaere, B. Cost-effective assessment of policy impact on biodiversity using species sensitivity scores.

DAISIE
Long Title: Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.europe-aliens.org/ Coordination: Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), UK Duration: 3 years from 2005 Short Summary In support of effective policies addressing alien invasive species in Europe, the project developed an information system on invasive species, including maps and information on risks and impacts, and on research and researchers on such species. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Online up-to-date database of 11,000 invasive species that threaten European terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments Database of experts on biological invasions in Europe. List of the 100 worst invasive species with ecological, economical and health risks and impacts over 70% of these have reduced native species diversity or altered the invaded community, and one fifth affected the prospects of endangered species. Summaries of the major patterns in the alien species of Europe, and comparison with data prior to the existence of DAISE. Published handbook on alien species in Europe including sections on planning for early detection, eradication and control-methods for decision-makers, environmental planners and others.

Relevance for Green Economy DAISIE is a key tool for assessing the impacts of invasive alien species in Europe. It is increasingly understood that invasive species cause an enormous damage to the economies of European countries (estimated at EUR6billion per year for key EU Member State economies; see Kettunen, M., Genovesi, P., Gollasch, S., Pagad, S., Starfinger, U., ten Brink, P. & Shine, C. 2009. Technical support to EU strategy on invasive species (IAS) - Assessment of the impacts of IAS in Europe and the EU. Final draft report for the European Commission. Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), Brussels, Belgium). Addressing invasive species has therefore a great potential for the creation of jobs. Reports DAISE Handbook of alien species in Europe: Preface, contents, contributors DAISE Handbook of alien species in Europe: Chapter 1 Key Publications Desprez-Loustau M. L., Robin, C., Buee, M., Courtecuisse, R., Garbaye, J., Suffert, F., Sache, I. & Rizzo, D.M. 2007. The fungal dimension of biological invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22:472-480. Hulme P.E. 2009. Trade, transport and trouble: managing invasive species pathways in an era of globalisation. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 10-18. Hulme P.E., Pyek P., Nentwig W. & Vil M. 2009. Will threat of biological invasions unite the European Union? Science 324: 40-41. Hulme P.E., Nentwig W., Pyek P. & Vil M. 2009. Common market, shared problems: time for a coordinated response to biological invasions in Europe? Neobiota 8: 3-19. Lambdon P. W., Pyek P., Basnou C., Delipetrou P., Essl F., Hejda M., Jarok V., P ergl J., Winter M., Andriopoulos P., Arianoutsou M., Bazos I., Brundu G., Celesti-Grapow L., Chassot P., Didiulis V., Jogan N., Josefsson M., Kark S., Klotz S., Kokkoris Y., Khn I., Marchante H., Perglov I., Vil M., Zikos A. & Hulme P. E. 2008. Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, geographical pattern and state of the art of research. Preslia 80: 101-149. Pyek P., Bacher S, Chytr M, Jarok V., Wild J., Celesti-Grapow L., Gasso N., Kenis M., Lambdon P.W., Nentwig W., Pergl J., Roques A., Sdlo J., Solarz W., Vil M & Hulme P.E. 2010. Contrasting patterns in the invasions of European terrestrial and freshwater habitats by alien plants, insects and vertebrates. Global Ecology & Biogeography 19: 317331. Vil M., Basnou C., Pyek P., Josefsson M., Genovesi, P., Gollasch S., Nentwig W., Olenin S., , Roques A., Roy D., Hulme P.E. & DAISIE partners. 2010. How well do we understand the impacts of alien species on ecosystem services? A pan-European cross-taxa assessment. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 8: 135-144. Winter M., Schweiger O., Klotz S., Nentwig W., Andriopoulos P., Arianoutsou M., Basnou C., Delipetrou P., Didziulis V., Hejda M., Hulme P.E., Lambdon P., Pergl J., Pyek P., Roy D.B. & Khn I. 2009. Plant extinctions and introductions lead to phylogenetic and taxonomic homogenization of the European flora. PNAS 106: 2172121725. Full list of publications 7

EUMON
Long Title: EU-wide monitoring methods and systems of surveillance for species and habitats of Community interest Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://eumon.ckff.si/index1.php Coordination: Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Duration: 3.5 years from 2004 Short Summary Review of biodiversity monitoring schemes in the EU and their contribution to the Birds and Habitats Directives. Identification of national responsibilities for species/ habitats of the directives. Contribution of amateur naturalists. Dabatase: BioMAT (Biodiversity Monitoring and Assessment Tool): 450 species and 173 habitat monitoring schemes. EBONE and SCALES will contribute to the continuation of the tool.

Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Data portal provides information on biodiversity monitoring in Europe, national responsibilities, and biodiversity coverage of the Natura 2000 network. Policy briefs produced on key messages for biodiversity monitoring. Showed that monitoring schemes based on volunteers do perform equally well or even better than professional schemes in most indicators of scientific quality and reliability. Provides recommendations for recruiting, motivating and retaining volunteers in monitoring schemes. BioMAT support tool developed to the coverage and characteristics of biodiversity monitoring schemes in Europe - recommendations for the design and analysis of monitoring programmes. Compiled methods to develop an efficient network of protected areas and has analysed gaps and biases in the NATURA 2000 network. Database on European biodiversity monitoring schemes (DaEuMon) PMN database that contains information on organisations that carry out volunteer based biodiversity monitoring. Relevance for Green Economy With the widespread acceptance for the need of monitoring to measure the achievement of EU-wide biodiversity targets, EUMON provides an overview of ongoing monitoring schemes. While stressing the importance of volunteer-based monitoring, EUMON allows for the identification of gaps in monitoring that are likely to be closed only through professional work conducted through national and local governments and agencies.

Reports EuMon policy briefs No 1: People Count Too - key issues for success in recruiting and retaining volunteers for biodiversity monitoring EuMon policy briefs No 2: A primer for biodiversity monitoring EuMon policy briefs No 3: Identification of national responsibilities and conservation priorities in Europe Recommendations for scientific quality, and time and cost-effectiveness of habitat monitoring schemes Manual Best practice for Monitoring Species and Habitats of Community Interests Final version of a coherent integrated methodology and user manual Full list of deliverables Key Publications Special issue on biodiversity monitoring of Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol. 17, no. 14 (2008). Henry P.-Y., Lengyel S., Nowicki P., Julliard R., Clobert J., elik T., Gruber B., Schmeller D.S., Babij V. & Henle K. 2008. Integrating ongoing biodiversity monitoring: potential benefits and methods. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(14): 3357-3382, (IF = 1.4). Lengyel S., Kobler A., Kutnar L., Framstad E., Henry P.-Y., Babij V., Gruber B., Schmeller D.S. & Henle K. 2008. A review and a framework for the integration of biodiversity monitoring at the habitat level. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(14): 3341-3356 (IF = 1.4). Devictor V., Godet L., Julliard R., Couvet D. & Jiguet F. 2007. Can common species benefit from protected areas? Biological Conservation 139(1-2): 29-36 (IF = 3.3). Jiguet F. & Julliard R. 2006. Inferences from common species communities for selecting conservation areas. Biodiversity and Conservation 15(3): 799-815 (IF = 1.4). Podjed D. & Muri R. 2008. Dialectical Relations between Professionals and Volunteers in a Biodiversity Monitoring Organisation. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(14): 3471-3483 (IF = 1.4). Schmeller D.S., Bauch B., Gruber B., Jukaitis R., Budrys E., Babij V., Lanno K., Sammul M., Varga Z. & Henle K. 2008. Determination of conservation priorities in regions with multiple political jurisdictions. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(14): 3623-363 (IF = 1.4). Full list of publications

EUR-OCEANS
Long Title: European Network of Excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.eur-oceans.eu/index.php and http://vds1719.sivit.org/eoc/ Coordination: France Innovations Scientifique et Transfert Duration: 4 years from 2005

Short Summary The project has built a network of excellence for European ocean ecosystem analysis through integrating European research organisations on global change and pelagic marine ecosystems. The long-term goal is to create a multi-site Institute for European Research on Ocean Ecosystems under Anthropogenic and Natural Forcings. On the scientific side, the project aimed at development and application of models to assess and forecast the impacts of climate and anthropogenic forcings on food-web dynamics (i.e. the structure, functioning, diversity and stability of marine food-webs). Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Integration of activities: sharing of research facilities and databases, coordination of observation systems. Database web portals on field data, model equations and descriptions, and model outputs. Model Shopping Tool (MoST) shares knowledge on ecosystem modelling, describing models at the process level in a user friendly manner for non-specialists. Transfer of knowledge from scientists to decision-makers through making funds available to attend and organise scientific workshops, working groups and conferences. Interactive knowledge transfer contact database of scientists and users to facilitate exchange between researchers and corporate users. Jointly Executed Research developing computer models capable of assessing and forecasting around four broad modelling tasks on: (i) pelagic ecosystems end-to-end, (ii) biogeochemistry, (iii) ecosystem approach to marine resources and (iv) within-system integration. Activities to spread excellence: training and education of researchers, annual EUR-OCEANS conferences and Network meetings, PhD and Post-Doc programmes, mobility programme and discussion forums. Factsheet series presents a scientific topic or research results in simple terms. Factsheets are intended as a medium to communicate issues and results to decision-makers and the general public. Open Access Policy: deposition of publications of the EUR-OCEANS community in open repositories, which increases access to, as well as visibility and citation of, research output by all academics, policy makers and others. Relevance for Green Economy EUR-OCEANS has envisaged a multi-site Institute for European Research on Ocean Ecosystems under Anthropogenic and Natural Forcings, which is likely to have a positive impact on a green economy in terms of job creation for marine scientists in several EU countries. Reports Full list of reports The Oceans, the Atmosphere and Climate Change: What should we know about? EUR-OCEANS Booklet Factsheet series List of research highlights

10

Key Publications

Nisumaa, A. -M., Pesant, S., Bellerby, R. G. J., Delille, B., Middelburg, J. J., Orr, J. C., Riebesell, U., Tyrrell, T., Wolf-Gladrow, D., Gattuso, J. P. 2010. EPOCA/EUR-OCEANS data compilation on the biological and biogeochemical responses to ocean acidification. Earth Syst. Sci. Data: 2, 167-175. doi: 10.5194/essd-2-167-2010. Cury, P. & Miserey, Y. 2008. UNE MER SANS POISSONS (A Sea Without Fish)...a future or present reality? Calmann-Lvy. http://www.euroceans.eu/research_highlights/index.php?num_information=710&wp=13#top_info

Preliminary publications list

EURO-LIMPACS
Long Title: Integrated project to evaluate the impacts of global change on European freshwater ecosystems Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.refresh.ucl.ac.uk/eurolimpacs Coordination: University College London Duration: 5 years from 2004 Short Summary Freshwater ecosystems, under stress from land-use change and pollution, face additional pressures from climate change, directly and through interaction with other drivers of change. Euro-limpacs is concerned with the science required to understand and manage the ecological consequences of these interactions. It focuses on the key drivers of aquatic ecosystem change (land-use, nutrients, acid deposition and toxic substances) and examines their interactions with global, especially climate, change using time-series analysis, space-for-time substitution, palaeolimnology, experiments and process modelling. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Increased understanding and knowledge of how climate change both directly and through interaction with other drivers (land-use change, nutrient loading, acid deposition, toxic pollution) has impacted and will impact on structure and functioning of European freshwater ecosystems. Examined how these multiple effects impact on efforts to manage freshwater ecosystems, in particular the implication for meeting the requirements of legislation such as the Water Framework Directive and Habitats Directive. Translated this knowledge so that the implications for future management of European freshwaters are clearly set out and incorporated into the development of numerous management tools.

11

Developed the Climate Change and Freshwater website (www.climate-and-freshwater.info) that provides information on how climate change affects freshwater ecosystems including presently used assessment systems, case studies, potential indicators and affected aquatic species. Identification of those species that will be negatively and positively affected by climate change. Improvement of the macroinvertebrate taxa and autecology database www.freshwaterecology.info, providing data in distribution patterns and ecological preferences of approximately 18,000 European freshwater taxa.

Relevance for Green Economy EURO-LIMPACS has provided a better understanding of the implications of key drivers for ecosystem change for the management of European freshwater ecosystems, which is expected to having a positive impact on a green economy in terms of job creation for the management of freshwater ecosystems and their ecosystem services. Reports Integrated Project to evaluate the Impacts of Global Change on European Freshwater Ecosystems: Publishable final activity report Full list of deliverables Key Publications Moss, B. et al. 2009. Climate change and the future of freshwater biodiversity in Europe: a primer for policy-makers. Freshwater Reviews https://www.fba.org.uk/journals/index.php/FRJ/article/view/134 Kronvang, B., Andersen, H. E., Brgesen, C., Dalgaard, T., Larsen, S. E., Bgestrand, J. & BlicherMathiasen, G. 2008. Effects of policy measures implemented in Denmark on nitrogen pollution of the aquatic environment. Environmental Science and Policy. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.10.007 OShea, L. C. M. & Wade, A. J. 2009. Land-use change and environmental effectiveness of nitrogen taxation: towards an integrated approach. Land Use Policy. Jackson, B. M., Browne, C. A., Peach, D., Wade, A. J. & Wheater, H. S. 2008. Nitrate transport in Chalk catchments monitoring, modelling and policy implications. Environmental Science and Policy. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.10.006 Moss, B. 2008. The Water Framework Directive: Total environment or political compromise? Science of the Total Environment. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.04.029 Maltby, E. (ed.) 2009. Functional Assessment of Wetlands; towards evaluation of ecosystem services. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge. Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. (eds.) 2008. Graf W., Murphy J., Dahl J., Zamora- Muoz C. & LpezRodrguez M.J. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms. Volume 1 Trichoptera. 388 pp. Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. (eds.) 2009. Graf W., Lorenz, A.W., Tierno de Figueroa, J.M., Lcke, S., Lpez-Rodrguez, M.J. & Davies, C. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms. Volume 2 Plecoptera. 262 pp. In print.

12

Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. (eds.) 2009. Buffagni, A., Armanini, D.G., Cazzola, M., LpezRodrguez, M.J. & Alba-Tercedor, J. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms. Volume 3 Ephemeroptera. In print. Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. (eds.) 2009. Schmutz, S., Grenouillet, G. et al. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms. Volume 4 Fish. In prep. Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. (eds.) 2009. Besse-Lotoskaya, A., Coste, M. et al. Distribution and Ecological Preferences of European Freshwater Organisms. Volume 5 Diatoms. In prep.

Full list of publications

GLOCHAMORE
Long Title: Global Change in Mountain Regions: An Integrated Assessment of Causes and Consequences Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://mri.scnatweb.ch/projects/glochamore/ Coordination: University Vienna Duration: 2 years from 2003 Short Summary The project developed an integrated research strategy for detecting environmental change in mountain regions to inform sustainable resource management strategies, relevant also for mountain-dependent lowland regions. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance GLOCHAMORE (Global Change and Mountain Regions) Research Strategy: product of a 2-years' negotiation between global change scientists and managers of UNESCO-MAB Mountain Biosphere Reserves (MBR) based on the inputs from the four thematic workshops. The results of this research strategy serve as a basis for MBR managers and other stakeholders to develop sustainable development policies. Relevance for Green Economy GLOCHAMORE developed a research strategy for detecting environmental change in mountain regions, with a focus on economic impacts. Thus, through informing decision-makers, a positive long-term impact on the creation of green jobs that address the harnessing of ecosystem services, can be expected. Reports GLOCHAMORE Research Strategy Annual Reports

13

Key Publications Price, M.F. (ed.) 2006. Global Change in Mountain Regions. Duncow: Sapiens. http://mri.scnatweb.ch/projects/glochamore/osc-perth-october-2005-publication-of-abstractsvolume.html Price, M., Bjrnsen Gurung, A., Dourojeanni, P. & Maselli, D. 2006. Social Monitoring in Mountain Biosphere Reserves: Conclusions from the EU GLOCHAMORE Project. Mountain Research and Development 26: 174-180. http://mri.scnatweb.ch/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=119&Itemi d=43 Grabherr, G., Bjrnsen Gurung, A., Dedieu, J.-P., Haeberli, W., Hohenwallner, D., Lotter, A., Nagy, L., Pauli, H. & Psenner R. 2005. Long-term Environmental Observations in Mountain Biosphere Reserves: recommendations from the EU-project GLOCHAMORE. Mountain Research and Development 25: 376-383. http://mri.scnatweb.ch/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=118&Itemi d=43 Bugmann, H., Bjrnsen Gurung, A., Ewert, F., Haeberli, W., Guisan, A., Fagre, D. & Kb, A. 2007. Modeling the Biophysical Impacts of Global Change in Mountain Biosphere Reserves. Mountain Research and Development 27(1): 66-77. http://mri.scnatweb.ch/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=115&Itemid=43 Becker, A., Krner, Ch., Bjrnsen Gurung, A. & Haeberli, W. 2007. Selected Issues from the Samedan GLOCHAMORE Workshop on Altitudinal Gradient Studies. Mountain Research and Development 27(1): 82-86. http://mri.scnatweb.ch/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=120&Itemid=43

HERMES
Long Title: Hotspot Ecosystem Research on the Margins of European Seas (and project extension) Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.eu-hermes.net/ Coordination: Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), National Oceanography Centre UK Duration: 4 years from 2005 + an extension of 28 months (HERMES TTC) Short Summary Through an interdisciplinary approach, the project attempted to understand European deep-water ecosystems and the interchange between biodiversity and the ecosystems. This will enable a European Ocean and Seas Integrated Government Policy in order to better carry out risk assessment, management and governance of these little understood ecosystems. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Co-ordinated research effort along the whole European margin, being able to integrate knowledge and new data in different marine sciences (geology, physical oceanography, chemistry and biology including microbiology). 14

Compared results at a number of contrasting locations along the European margin and within different biogeochemical settings, focusing expertise and using common methods in these different study areas. Stimulated co-ordination of the large-scale infrastructure of Europes marine institutions. HERMES has produced a series of briefing documents - the Deep-Sea Briefs - on various topics relating to research and issues affecting the deep sea environment. Imagery and video footage collect by HERMES partners provided to Google Earth as parts of their Oceans layer. HERMES GIS created to show all HERMES data to enable scientists visualize all the datasets from Geology, Biology, Oceanography and Socio-economics for each study site.

Relevance for Green Economy HERMES is expected to inform decision-makers in terms of improved governance of European oceans and seas and a positive long-term impact on a green economy can be expected as improved management is likely to have an impact on job creation. Reports Final report (The Hermes Story) is a book http://www.eu-hermes.net/news.html. The results of the HERMES project are summarised in a special volume of the journal Oceanography www.tos.org/oceanography. Reports from the HERMES Science-Policy Panel Key Publications Bailey et al. 2009. Long-term changes in deep-water fish populations of the north-east Atlantic. Proc.Royal Soc. B, doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0098 De Mol, B., Querol, N., Davies, A.J., Schfer, A., Foglini, F., Gonzales-Mirelis, G., Kopke, K., Dunne, D., Schewe, I., Trincardi, F. & Canals, M. 2009. HERMES-GIS, a tool connecting scientists and policymakers. Oceanography 22(1): 144-153. [Download PDF] Danovaro et al. 2008. Major viral impact on the functioning of benthic deep-sea ecosystems. Nature 454: 1084-1087; doi:10.1038/nature0726 Armstrong, C.W. & Van den Hove, S. 2007. The formation of policy for protection of cold-water coral off the coast of Norway. Marine Policy, in press and available online doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2007.04.007 Guinotte et al. 2006. Will human-induced changes in seawater chemistry alter the distribution of deep-sea scleractinian corals? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4(3): 141-146. Roberts et al. 2006. Reefs of the deep: the biology and geology of cold-water coral ecosystems. Science 312: 543-547. Full list of publications

15

HighARCS
Long Title: Highland aquatic resources conservation and sustainable development Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://www.HighARCS.org/ Coordination: University of Essex, UK Duration: 4 years from January 2009 Short Summary Biodiversity and livelihoods at five sites in China, India and Vietnam are researched, through a participatory and multidisciplinary process, with the aim of developing action plans at the sites. The research looks at biodiversity and ecosystem services, livelihood strategies of households in relation to ecosystem services, and issues of governance, stakeholder views and areas of conflict. The project also explores the gendering and generationing of intra-household dynamics by including the perspectives of men, women, children and young people. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance The project will assess highland aquatic resources at five sites in Asia and then formulate and implement action plans with stakeholders. Best practices will be communicated to potential users to promote uptake and enhanced policy formulation. Production of a report on institutions, policy and conflicts, and policy, conservation and livelihood action plans for each site. Work Package 8 on Policy Development to Support Conservation and Wise Use will develop: Report on institutional and policy impact of action plans formulated and implemented at field sites. Report on effectiveness of policy actions plans with respect to formulating policy in support of conservation and wise-use of highland aquatic resources. Appropriate communication media aimed at policy-makers to promote the conservation of highland aquatic resources and wise-use and sustainable development. Relevance for Green Economy HighARCS assesses aquatic resources at five sites in Asian highlands and will develop livelihood-relevant action plans. Thus, an immediate positive impact for a green economy in the three selected project countries can be expected, addressing the harnessing of the natural capital and associated ecosystem services through green jobs. People living in the major river basins where the HighARCS project is working stand to benefit greatly from action to conserve and enhance the range of ecosystem services derived from highland aquatic resources that sustain economic activity and promote well-being.

16

Reports Bimbao, M.A., & Pearanda, V. 2010. HighARCS project communication strategy including field guide to project communication planning & communication plans per field site. FishBase Information & Research Group, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines. Kundu, N., Pal, M. & Dutta, J. 2010. Situation Analysis Report: Uttarakhand Site. CEMPD & IESWM, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. Cai Kunzhen, Chen Fengbo, Cui Ke, Gao Min, Fu Jinghua, Gan Lian, He Hongzhi, Jiang Baoguo, Luo Shiming, Liu Yiming, Li Huashou, Shang Rongchun, Tong Xiaoli, Wang Quandian, Wang Wenzhong, Ye Yanqiong, Zhang Jiaen, Zhao Huihong & Zhuang Xueying. 2010. HighARCS Situation Analysis Report China Site. South China Agricultural University, China. Nguyen, T.H.T., Nguyen, T.T., Nguyen, H.D. & Do, V.T. 2010. HighARCS Situation Analysis Report: Vietnam. RIA1, Hanoi, Vietnam. Ray, D., Ghosh, M., Majumdar, S., Kanungoe, P. & Mishra, R. 2010. HighARCS Situation Analysis Report on Buxa. CDHI, Jalpaiguri, West Bengal, India. Smith, K. 2010. Report on the IUCN Red List assessments conducted for the HighARCS project. IUCN Freshwater Biodiversity Unit, Cambridge, UK.

Key Publications Bunting, S.W. 2010. Assessing the stakeholder Delphi for facilitating interactive participation and consensus building for sustainable aquaculture development. Society and Natural Resources 23: 758775. Bunting, S.W., Pretty, J. & Edwards, P. 2010. Wastewater-fed aquaculture in the East Kolkata Wetlands: anachronism or archetype for resilient ecocultures? Reviews in Aquaculture 2: 138-153.

HUNT
Long Title: Hunting for Sustainability Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://fp7hunt.net/ Coordination: Macaulay Institute, UK Duration: 2.5 years from 2008 Short Summary The overall goal of the project is to assess the social, cultural, economic and ecological functions and impacts of hunting across a broad range of contexts in Europe (6 countries) and Africa (Ethiopia and 17

Tanzania). Through an interdisciplinary approach, HUNT seeks to understand what influences value systems and attitudes to hunting, how these attitudes influence and determine individual and societal behaviour in hunting, and finally, how this hunting behaviour influences biodiversity. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Will bring together four different study disciplines through separate work packages; sociology, political science, economy and ecology in order to reduce the lack of knowledge regarding hunting and biodiversity. Will assess the economic importance of hunting and alternative forms of land use at different spatial scales. Will assess the social, cultural, economic and ecological functions and impacts of hunting across a broad range of contexts in Europe and Africa, and integrate these into the European policy context and its wider global application. Will communicate with policy makers and stakeholders on the design and implementation of key project results. Will develop fora for the implementation of methodologies for the reconciliation of conflicts between key stakeholders over hunting practices. Will consider of which species are hunted, what harvesting strategies are employed and build models to quantify sustainability of these strategies. Production of factsheets on hunting within countries.

Relevance for Green Economy HUNT seeks to improve the economic relevance of sustainable hunting. In many countries, hunting is a key job provider in rural areas and thus a positive impact of HUNT on a green economy is expected. Reports None as yet Factsheets Key Publications Nilsen, E. B., Brseth, H.,Odden, J., & Linnell, J.D.C. 2010. The cost of maturing early in a solitary carnivore. Oecologia 164: 943948. Milner-Gulland, E.J., Arroyo, B., Bellard, C., Blanchard, J., Bunnefeld, N., Delibes-Mateos, M., Edwards, C., Nuno, A., Palazy, L., Reljic, S., Riera, P. & Skrbinsek, T. 2010. New directions in management strategy evaluation through cross-fertilization between fisheries science and terrestrial conservation. Biology Letters (submitted. Published online before print July 21, 2010). Hanley, N., Czajkowski, M., Hanley-Nickolls, R. & Redpath, S. 2010. Economic Values of Species Management Options in Human-Wildlife Conflicts: Hen Harriers in Scotland. Ecological Economics (Submitted).

18

Linnell, J. D. C., Brseth, H., Odden, J. & Nilsen, E. B. 2010. Sustainably harvesting a large carnivore? Development of Eurasian lynx populations in Norway during 160 years of shifting policy. Environmental Management 45: 11421154. Sther, B. E., Engen, S., Odden, J., Linnell, J. D. C., Grtan, V. & Andrn, H. 2010. Sustainable harvest strategies for age-structured lynx populations: The use of reproductive value. Biological Conservation (in press; doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.048).

LiveDiverse
Long Title: Sustainable Livelihoods and Biodiversity in Riparian Areas in Developing Countries Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://www.livediverse.eu/ Coordination: Linkpings University, Sweden Duration: 3 years from 2009 Short Summary The project develops new knowledge on the interface between livelihoods and biodiversity in riparian contexts, through case studies in Vietnam, India, South Africa and Costa Rica. The analysis of biodiversity values, sustainable use and livelihoods (biodiversity governance) within the project adopts vulnerability as a unifying concept, taking the point of departure in the concepts of biodiversity and livelihood vulnerability. Maps will identify biodiversity and livelihood hotspots, and biodiversity and livelihood scenarios will be developed, which will examine future trends, threats and developments in order to formulate strategies and policy. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance The LiveDiverse project is split into four phases: 1) Review of existing data and construction of the knowledge database, methods to improve understanding of public beliefs, perceptions, attitudes and preferences, and public participation. 2) Measuring biodiversity and livelihoods vulnerability. 3) Mapping livelihood and diversity vulnerability through GIS. 4) Integrated vulnerability scenarios to help improve policy-making capacity for biodiversity and livelihoods. As part of these some of the key objectives of policy relevance are to: Produce knowledge that will improve and assess value-based strategies that promote sustainable livelihoods and protect ecosystems. Analyze existing policy instruments and formulate new ones for sustainable livelihoods and diversity. Contribute to the development of policy instruments and tools for conflict prevention, resolution and reconciliation. 19

Relevance for Green Economy LiveDiverse addresses livelihoods and biodiversity in riparian ecosystems in four developing countries. Improved strategies for biodiversity and livelihood-friendly policies are an envisaged outcome of the project and thus a positive impact on a green economy in the project countries is expected. Reports Grizzetti B. et al 2010. Knowledge base for ecological, socio-economic, cultural-spiritual and policy analysis. (LiveDiverse Project Deliverable 2.1) LiveDiverse D2.1 knowledge base Bouma, J. & Huitema, D. 2010. Socio-Economic Vulnerability: Conservation-Development Trade-Offs and Agency in Multi-Level Governance Process. (Deliverable 6.1: A multi-disciplinary, analytical framework to integrate livelihood and biodiversity analysis across multiple cases, including the household survey and case study protocol): LiveDiverse Deliverable 6.1 July 2010 Joy K.J. & Paranjape, S. 2010. Identify interconnections between their cultural and spiritual practices and biodiversity in the area: Analytical framework and methodology. (Milestone 7.1 report).m 7.1 cultural and spiritual vulnerability for distribution Lpez, A., Hernndez, A., Villalobos, E. & Cedeo, B. 2010. Livelihoods and Biodiversity Futures: Building Scenarios for the Terraba River Basin, the Greater Kruger Park, the Warana River Basin, Ba Be National Park and Na Hang Nature Reserve. Scenarios Report Gooch, G., Rieu-Clarke, A., Allan, A., Guignier, A. & Yasuda, Y. 2010. Initial Institutional Analysis. LiveDiverse Milestone 9.1 Report. Initial Institutional Analysis final Key Publications Uribe, M. 2010. Terraba Sierpe Wetlands Management plan: Struggling for policy change and its implementation. MSc thesis. Struggling for policy change and its implementation FINAL AL changes Medvey, J. 2010. Benefits of Burden? Community Participation in Natural Resource Management in the Greater Kruger Park Area. MSc thesis. medvey_benefits_or_burden Trepp, E. 2010. Chandoli National Park and Resettlement: Impacts on Local Communities in Maharashtra, India. MSc thesis. Final thesis elisatrepp Full list of publications

MACIS
Long Title: Minimisation of and Adaptation to Climate Change: Impacts on Biodiversity Framework Programme: FP6 Website: www.macis-project.net Coordination: UFZ Leipzig - Halle Duration: 2 years from 2006 Short Summary 20

MACIS reviewed and meta-analysed the existing projections of climate change impacts on biodiversity. It assessed the available options to prevent and minimise negative impacts for the EU25 up to 2050 and reviewed the state-of-the-art on methods to assess the probable future impacts of climate change on biodiversity. This includes the review of possible climate change adaptation and mitigation measures and their potential effect on future biodiversity. MACIS aimed to further develop a series of biodiversity and habitat models that address biodiversity impacts, and are capable of calculating the consequences of the changes in the trends in drivers as specified by the narrative scenarios provided by the IPCC. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Provided a detailed assessment of already observed and of potential impacts of climate change on biodiversity. Developed prediction models, and reviewed their contribution, for assessing the impacts of climate change and calculating the consequences of changes in trends. Analysed policies for biodiversity under climate change, and identified policy options to prevent and minimise the negative impacts from climate change. Assessment of available options to prevent and minimise impacts up for the EU25 up to 2050. Relevance for Green Economy MACIS has analysed observed and potential impacts of climate change on biodiversity, with a view to inform climate change-relevant policies. A positive long-term impact on a green economy is expected through a better-informed decision-making on biodiversity and climate change in the future. Reports Deliverable 1.1: Climate change impacts on European biodiversity observations and future projections. PDF, 470 KB Deliverable 2.1: Review paper of the contribution of different models for assessing the impacts of climate change. PDF, 541 KB Deliverables 2.2 and 2.3: Meta-analysis of adaptation and mitigation measures across the EU25 and their impacts and recommendations how negative impacts can be avoided. PDF, 1.58 MB Deliverable 3.4: Report on improved method for reserve selection. PDF, 436 KB Deliverable 3.5: Report on the results of the run of improved modeling to Europe PDF, Deliverable 4.1: Policy Analysis for Biodiversity under climate change. PDF, 522 KB Deliverable 4.2: Policy options to prevent/minimise negative impacts on biodiversity. PDF, 188 KB Key Publications Khn, I., Settele, J., Nigmann, U., Rattei, S., Schmidt, A. & MACIS Partners. 2007. Policy options to minimize negative effects of climate change on biodiversity. Sustainable Neighbourhood - from Lisbon to Leipzig through Research, Leipzig, 8-10 May 2007. Araujo, M.B., Nogues-Bravo, D., Reginster, I., Rounsevell, M. & Whittaker, R.J. 2008. Exposure of European biodiversity to changes in human-induced pressures. Environmental Science and Policy 11: 38-45. 21

Thuiller W. 2007. Biodiversity - Climate Change and the Ecologist. Nature 448: 550-552. Arlington, V.A., Hannah, L., Midgley, G.F., Andelmand, S., Arajo, M.B., Hughes, G., Martinez-Meyer, E., Pearson, R. & Williams, P.H. 2007. Protected area needs in a changing climate. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 5: 131-138. Barnard, P. & Thuiller, W. (2008) Global change and biodiversity: future challenges. Biology Letters 4, 553-555. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0374. Khn, I., Sykes, M.T., Berry, P.M., Thuiller, W., Piper, J.M., Nigmann, U., Arajo, M.B., Balletto, E., Bonelli, S., Cabeza, M., Guisan, A., Hickler, T., Klotz, S., Metzger, M., Midgley, G., Musche, M., Olofsson, J., Paterson, J.S., Penev, L., Rickebusch, S., Rounsevell, M.D.A.R., Schweiger, O., Wilson, E. & Settele, J. 2008. MACIS: Minimisation of and Adaptation to Climate change Impacts on biodiverSity. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 17/4: 393-395. Paterson, J.S., Arajo, M.B., Berry, P.M., Piper, J.M. and Rounsevell, M.D.A.R. 2008. Mitigation, adaptation and the threat to biodiversity. Conservation Biology 22 (5), 1352- 1355. Wilson, E. & Piper J. 2008. Spatial Planning for Biodiversity under a Changing Climate. European Environment 18, 3, 135-151.

Full list of publications

MODELKEY
Long Title: Models for Assessing and Forecasting the Impact of Environmental Key Pollutants on Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems and Biodiversity Framework Programme: FP6 Website: http://www.modelkey.org/ Coordination: UFZ Leipzig-Halle Duration: 5 years from 2005 Short Summary The project developed models for key European waters for river basins and adjacent coastal zones, and an assessment tool for the identification of key modes of action. An end-user-directed decision support system was provided for cost-effective tool selection and appropriate risk and site prioritisation. The project responded to the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Main findings of the project: o evidence of toxic stress in aquatic ecosystems, o evidence that impairment of ecological status results from impact of multiple stressors, o suggest a tiered approach to assess impact of chemicals on ecological status, o suggest a new approach for deriving candidate compounds for monitoring and prioritisation, o call for consideration of bioavailability and bioaccumulation in chemical status assessments, 22

o suggest improvements for WFD water quality monitoring programmes, o provide new integrated tools for basin-scale risk assessment and decision making. Recommendations formulated for implementation of the WFD. Developed a Decision Support System (DSS), providing free, user-friendly GIS capabilities, that combines several risk-based assessment tools, classifies the ecological and chemical status for individual water bodies, prioritizes hotspots, and supports additional monitoring and external tools.

Relevance for Green Economy Water quality, in freshwater and marine systems, is a regular provider of jobs. By developing models for the impacts of environmental pollutants on European river basin and coastal zone ecosystems, MODELKEY is likely to contribute to more efficient addressing of such pollutants, with positive impacts on water-related ecosystems and biodiversity, and is thus likely to have a positive impact on a green economy in European countries. Reports Brochure summarising MODELKEY's key findings and recommendations Executive Summaries of Activities Reports Key Publications Hein M et al. 2010. MODELKEY - Key findings and recommendations for reaching the EU Water Framework Directives quality objectives. Umweltwiss. Schadst. Forsch. 22 (3): 217-228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12302-010-0137-2 Agostini P et al. 2009. Indicators and endpoints for risk-based decision processes with decision support systems. In: Marcomini A, Suter GW II, Critto A (eds). Decision Support Systems for Risk Based Management of Contaminated Sites. Springer, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 95-113. Link to book at www.springer.com Gottardo S et al. 2009. MODELKEY: a decision support system for the assessment and evaluation of impacts on aquatic ecosystems. In: Marcomini A, Suter GW II, Critto A (eds). Decision Support Systems for Risk Based Management of Contaminated Sites. Springer, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 331-351. link to book at www.springer.com Gottardo S et al. 2008. Supporting tools for decisional process within Water Framework Directive: from European context to MODELKEY perspective. In: Gnen IE, Vadineanu, A, Wolflin J, Russo, RC (eds). Sustainable Use and Development of Watersheds. Springer, New York, pp. 215-255. Full list of publications

RUBICODE
Long Title: Rationalising Biodiversity Conservation in Dynamic Ecosystems Framework Programme: FP6 23

Website: http://www.rubicode.net/rubicode/index.html Coordination: University of Oxford Duration: 2.5 years from 2006 Short Summary The project aimed at increased awareness of biodiversity and better informed biodiversity policy by defining and evaluating ecosystem services: What biodiversity does for us.

Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Reviewed information on ecosystem services for the main terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems in Europe the condition of most services has degraded or they have a mixed status. Investigated the importance of quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services at all levels of organization. Developed the Framework for Ecosystem Service Provision (FESP) to assess the impacts of environmental change drivers on ecosystem services and identify the mechanisms of either mitigation or adaptation that would derive from policy and management responses. Reviewed the indicators of ecosystem services most did not directly address service provision and lacked coverage on the functional, structural and genetic biodiversity components. Developed a framework to highlight the relationship between present conservation approaches and the provision of services in dynamic ecosystems. Production of three databases: o Case studies on the quantification of ecosystem services using the service-providing units (SPU). o Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales. o Linking functional traits and ecosystem service provision. Relevance for Green Economy RUBICODE analysed the relationship between key environmental drivers, current conservation approaches, and key ecosystem services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. The project is therefore likely to address improved harnessing of the natural capital and its associated ecosystem services and is through this expected to positively contribute to the green economy. Reports Final Brochure Full list of outputs Key Publications de Bello, F., Lavorel, S., Gerhold, P., Reier, U. & Prtel, M. 2010. A biodiversity monitoring framework for practical conservation of grasslands and shrublands. Biological Conservation. 24

Rounsevell, M.D.A., Dawson, T.P. & Harrison, P.A. 2010. A conceptual framework to assess the effects of environmental change on ecosystem services. Biodiversity and Conservation, DOI 10.1007/s10531-010-9838-5. de Bello, F., Lavorel S., Daz S., Harrington R., Cornelissen J.H.C., Bardgett R.D., Berg M.P., Cipriotti P., Feld C.K., Hering D., Silva P.M.d., Potts S.G., Sandin L., Sousa J.P., Storkey J., Wardle D.A. & Harrison, P.A. (published online: 10 April 2010). Towards an assessment of multiple ecosystem processes and services via functional traits. Biodiversity and Conservation. Feld, C.K., Martins da Silva, P., Sousa, J.P., de Bello, F., Bugter, R., Grandin, U., Hering, D., Lavorel, S., Mountford, O., Pardo, I., Prtel, M., Rmbke, J., Sandin, L., Jones, K.B. & Harrison, P.A. 2009. Indicators of biodiversity and ecosystem services: a synthesis across ecosystems and spatial scales. Oikos 118: 1862-1871. Luck, G.W., Harrington, R., Harrison, P.A., Kremen, C., Berry, P.M., Bugter, R., Dawson, T.P., de Bello, F., Dia, S., Feld, C.K., Haslett, J.R., Hering, D., Kontogianni, A., Lavorel, S., Rounsevell, M., Samways, M.J., Sandin, L., Settele, J., Sykes, M.T., Van de Hove, S., Vandewalle, M. & Zobel, M. 2009. Quantifying the contribution of organisms to the provision of ecosystem services. Bioscience 59(3): 223-235. Luck, G.W., Kremen, C., Harrington, R. & Harrison, P.A. 2009. Response to The economic value of ecosystem services. Bioscience 59(6): 461-462. Daz, S., Lavorel, S., de Bello, F., Qutier, F., Grigulis, K. & Robson, T.M. 2007. Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. PNAS 104, 20684-20689. [Download PDF] Feld, C.K., Sousa, J.P., Martins da Silva, P. & Dawson, T.P. 2010. Indicators for biodiversity and ecosystem services: towards an improved framework for ecosystems assessment. Biodiversity and Conservation, DOI 10.1007/s10531-010-9875-0. Haslett, J.R., Berry, P.M., Bela, G., Jongman, R.H.G., Pataki, G., Samways, M.J. & Zobel, M. 2010. Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodiversity and Conservation, DOI 10.1007/s10531-009-9743-y.

Full list of publications

SCALES
Long Title: Securing the conservation of biodiversity across administrative levels and spatial, temporal and ecological scales Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://www.scales-project.net/ Coordination: Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany Duration: 5+ years from 2009 Short Summary

25

The project aims to provide assessment tools and policy instruments for biodiversity conservation that respond to the appropriate temporal and spatial scales, through assessing and modelling socioeconomic drivers and the resulting environmental pressures. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance The project is currently in its initiation. However, its main relevant objectives are to: Assess and model the socio-economic driving forces and resulting environmental pressures (habitat loss and fragmentation, changing climate, disturbance) affecting European biodiversity across scales. Analyse the scale-dependent impacts of these pressures on components of biodiversity ranging from genes to species populations to biotic communities and ecosystems. Develop and evaluate new methods for upscaling and downscaling to facilitate the provision of environmental, ecological, and socio-economic information at relevant and matching scales. Assess the effectiveness and efficiency of policy instruments and identify innovative policy instruments to address scale-related conservation problems; improve multilevel biodiversity governance. Evaluate the practical suitability and matching of methods and policy instruments to deliver effective European biodiversity conservation across scales, using networks of protected areas, regional connectivity, and monitoring of status and trend of biodiversity as a common testing ground. Translate the results into policy and management recommendations and integrate them in a web based support tool kit (SCALESTOOL) to support sustainable conservation action across scales. Disseminate the results to policy makers, biodiversity managers, scientists, and the general public. Relevance for Green Economy SCALES is aiming at the provision of assessment tools for biodiversity conservation at relevant temporal and spatial scales, thus providing policy-makers with improved information that takes the relevant scales into account. As a result, improved biodiversity conservation is expected, which should favour job creation and thus support the greening of the economy. SCALES already delivered a Review of the impact of policy and socio-economic drivers on anthropogenic processes and pressures to biodiversity. This includes a summary of the drivers that directly or indirectly affect biodiversity, the identification and mapping of appropriate indicators for those drivers, and a scale-sensitive typology of drivers that classifies and summarises the behaviour of drivers across multiple administrative levels. The typology is based on how the intensity of the drivers and their evenness among the compared units change as we move across administrative level. Whereas scale-insensitive drivers may be addressed by a common approach across Europe, scale-sensitive drivers need policies that account for these differences and this should facilitate the development of a greening of the economy. This typology resulted in five categories. Most of the indicators referring to economic sectors (with the exception of tourism) or to demographic factors show minimal changes as we move across administrative levels. In contrast, most direct drivers show high scale sensitivity with characteristic examples being deforestation, agricultural conversion, and wetland loss. 26

Reports SCALES organised a stakeholder meeting, held in Brussels on 21 September 2010. In the meeting, both EU and national level biodiversity policies were explored from the scale perspective with a range of EU and national stakeholders. The aim of this meeting was to investigate how scales issues could be better integrated into environmental governance at all levels in the European Union and its Member States. In addition, the meeting hoped to initiate an ongoing dialogue between the project and relevant stakeholders, this way ensuring that the outcomes of the project reflect the needs of its end users. The participants of the workshop represented the European, national and sub-national levels, and included decision-makers from various government agencies and NGO representatives. As a key result from the stakeholder workshop, it was identified that the main scale-related challenges originate from the complexity of biodiversity itself, and from the problems within governance structures aiming to address and conserve this complexity. In general, dealing with a number of different scales simultaneously is extremely difficult and current policy frameworks are not effectively able to address the full breath of ecological phenomena and to take into account the fact that species and ecosystem processes operate at different scales. At the governance level, the stakeholders identified difficulties in integrating biodiversity conservation objectives set by EU, national, sub-national or local levels into the objectives and decisions at other levels. Contradictions between, or perverse effects by, different sectoral policies reflected throughout their implementation - were identified as one of the key underlying reasons resulting in the low level of biodiversity integration in practice. To overcome these challenges participants identified a need for better integration of biodiversity policies across policy sectors and levels, and better communication within these governing structures, i.e. new modes of cooperation, communication and governance. In this context, the stakeholders acknowledged for example that responding to many policy challenges requires a greater coordination between top-down policy design and implementation and bottom-up identification of problems and solutions in nature conservation. With the aim to develop cross-scale communication, the stakeholders argued that social learning can be encouraged by creating platforms where stakeholders that operate at different governance and administrative levels could share concerns and solutions. Establishing thematic networks was seen as another way to integrate existing activities. Also, developing best practice guidance was seen as one opportunity to bridge the gap between EU, national and local levels on landuse issues. In practical terms, the stakeholders called for the development of new interdisciplinary approaches; they encouraged marrying ecological expertise with geographical and social expertise in land-use planning. Moreover, they encouraged further clarification and uptake of new concepts, such as ecosystem services, that highlight the socio-economic value of biodiversity and the role of various sectoral policies behind biodiversity loss. Workshop proceedings. Key Publications Henle, K. et al. 2010. Securing the Conservation of Biodiversity across Administrative Levels and Spatial, Temporal, and Ecological Scales. Gaia. Settele, J. & Khn, E. 2009. Insect Conservation. Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1176892 27

Stevens, V., Turlure, C. & Baguette, M. 2010. A meta-analysis in butterflies. Biological Reviews. 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00119.x Mazaris, A.D., Kallimanis, A.S., Tzanopoulos, J. Sgardelis, S.P. & Pantis, J.D. 2010. Can we predict the number of plant species from the richness of a few common genera, families or orders? Journal of Applied Ecology. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123394785/abstract Stevens, V.M., Pavoine, S. & Baguette, M. 2010. Variation within and between closely related species uncovers high intra-specific variability in dispersal. Plos One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011123 Santos, R., Ring, I., Antunes, P. & Clemente, P. 2010. Fiscal transfers for biodiversity conservation: the Portuguese Local Finances Law. UFZ Diskussionspapiere. http://www.ufz.de/data/DP_11_2010_Ring_Portugal_Finances13948.pdf Keil, P., Biesmeijer, J.C., Barendregt, A., Reemer, M. & Kunin, W. E. 2010. Biodiversity change is scale-dependent: an example from Dutch and UK hoverflies (Diptera, Syrphidae). Ecography. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06554.x

Full list of publications

SOILSERVICE
Long Title: Conflicting demands of land use, soil biodiversity and sustainable delivery of ecosystem goods and services in Europe Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://www.kem.ekol.lu.se/soilservice/index.html Coordination: Lund University, Sweden Duration: 3.5 years from 2008 Short Summary The projects objective is to understand how economic drivers will change current and future use of soilrelated ecosystem services and how they affect diversity and sustainability of agricultural soils, through analysis of farm sites in Europe along gradients of moisture and temperature and with soil differences, and through analysis of biodiversity of soil organisms. This will allow for scenarios and predictions. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance Analysis of field data has shown that microbial biomass is lower in intensively managed agriculture than in grassland soils. Soil food webs were constructed from biomass of the trophic groups of soil organisms and webs from the soils with intensive crop rotation have a structure that are based on fungi and bacteria and the webs are less diverse than those in pastures Extended drought and dry-wet cycles expected at climate change reduce the ability of the soils to retain potentially leachable inorganic nitrogen by 125%. 28

Changes in soil C during intensive agriculture indicate that a 1% yearly reduction in soil C causes a ca. 1% reduction in yield of winter wheat. Scenarios of future agriculture and land use from published data has been adapted for the purposes of Soilservice and results over 25 years show that with a decrease of soil carbon by 1% per year, only two out of four scenarios will yield low profits for farmers. Only with increasing soil carbon levels farming can be profitable Final outcomes of the project include: o Thresholds for soil biodiversity will be established that ensure sustainable production. o Threshold values for ecosystem stability will be determined to forecast consequences of intensified land use. o Valuing the costs and benefits of the stability and resilience of soil biodiversity in agriculture o Provide decision-makers in linking policy, land-use, ecosystem services with predictive tools. The project aims to address multiple policies within the EU and contribute to the EU Soil Strategy and a future Soil Directive, and to develop predictive scenario-based approach tools allowing decision-makers to link to policy and promote sustainable land-use and soil ecosystem services.

Relevance for Green Economy SOILSERVICE addresses the impact of economic drivers on soil-related ecosystem services, by undertaking research in farmland ecosystem services in Europe. The envisaged improved understanding of the functioning of ecosystem services is expected to inform policy-making for rural economies and thus directly contributing to a green economy. Reports Summary of Soilservice 2009 Summary of Soilservice as of February 2011 (sent separately with this report, to be posted on project website in due course) Workshop Reports Conference Reports Key Publications None as yet

STEP
Long Title: Status and Trends of European Pollinators Framework Programme: FP7 Website: http://www.step-project.net Coordination: University of Reading, UK Duration: 5 years from February 2010

29

Short Summary The project aims at understanding the status of wild and domesticated pollinators in Europe, the extent of and reasons for their decline, the impacts of the decline, and mitigation options for policy in the form of evidence-based decision-support tools. Key Achievements of Policy Relevance To date has reviewed the current status of knowledge for global pollinators and brought together information on the trends, impacts of loss and drivers of change published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution. The main policy-relevant aims of the project over the next 5 years are to: o Document the status and trends of pollinators (managed honeybees, wild bees and hoverflies) and animal-pollinated plant populations; o Determine and analyse the multiple pressures that are driving changes in pollinators and animal-pollinated plants at scales ranging from single fields to landscapes to the whole of Europe; o Assess the impact of changes in pollinator populations and communities on wild plants and crops and changes in floral resources on pollinators; o Evaluate and synthesize strategies to mitigate the impacts of changes in pollinators and animal-pollinated plants; o Assess how multiple drivers affect pollinators and animal-pollinated plants at local and landscapes scales using focused empirical tests and observations; o Analyse and improve the interface between the scientific knowledge-base on pollinator change assessment and policy instruments to reduce pollinator/pollination loss and mitigate its effects; o Develop communication and educational links with a wide range of stakeholders and the general public on the importance of recent shifts in pollinators, the main drivers and impacts of pollinator shifts and mitigation strategies through dissemination and training. Relevance for Green Economy Pollinators play an important role in many rural economies, by supporting crop production. STEP aims at a better understanding of the problems facing pollinators throughout Europe. It is expected that such improved knowledge allows for the allocation of resources into the conservation and management of pollinators which should support a green economy in rural areas. Reports Deliverables (newsletters, leaflets & posters; more deliverables are in preparation) Key Publications (More publications are in preparation or are not yet available)

30

Potts, S.G., Biesmeijer, J.C., Kremen, C., Neumann, P., Schweiger, O. &. Kunin, W.E. 2010. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. http://www.ufz.de/data/Potts%20et%20al%20201012437.pdf Brittain, C.A. & Potts, S.G. 2011. The potential impacts of insecticides on the life-history traits of bees and the consequences for pollination. Basic and Applied Ecology. doi:10.1016/j.baae.2010.12.004 in press. Schweiger, O., Biesmeijer, K., Bommarco, R., Hickler, T., Hulme, P.E, Klotz, S., Khn, I., Moora, M., Nielsen, A., Ohlemller, R., Petanidou, T., Potts, S.G, Pyek, P., Stout, J., Sykes, M., Tscheulin, T., Vil, M., Walther, G., Westphal, C., Winter, M., Zobel, M. & Settele, J. 2010. Multiple stressors on biotic interactions: how climate change and alien species interact to affect pollination. Biological Reviews 85: 777-795.

31

Annex II: Screening of FP6 and FP7 projects

Scores: 1 = poor, 2 = alright/average, 3 = fits well/fully satisfying Note that comments in bracket have not been inserted systematically. Information for applying criteria 9 was not available.

Table 1: FP6 projects

Project/criteria 1 geographic coverage 2 extent 3 Applicable outside Europe 2 2 (requires strong scientific institutions) 2 4 Holistic approach 5 Consequences for existing policies 3 2 6 Requiring new policy action 3 2 7 High innovation potential 8 Fits into UNEP MTS 9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities 10 Supports Green Economy 2 2 Total score

ALARM & ALARM TTC ALTERNET

3 (Europe) 3 (Europe)

3 3

3 3

2 2

3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (ecosystem approach)

21 22

BASIN

BIOSCORE

3 (Europe, North America) 3 (all of Europe)

3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (highly relevant for ecosystem planning) tbd

23

3 (relevant for all levels of policy) 2

BIOSTRAT

3 (all of EU)

2 (internet speed & data availability might be a problem) 2

3 (does not include ecosystem sensitivities would be very difficult) 2

24

COBO

3 (EU)

3 (highly relevant for knowledge management) 2 (limited in terms of ecosystem

tbd

17

18

32

Project/criteria

1 geographic coverage

2 extent

3 Applicable outside Europe

4 Holistic approach

5 Consequences for existing policies

6 Requiring new policy action 3 3 3

7 High innovation potential

8 Fits into UNEP MTS

9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities

10 Supports Green Economy

Total score

COCONUT DAISIE ECOCHANGE

3 3 (Europe) 3 (Europe)

2 2 2

3 3 2 (problems of data availability) 2 3

2 2 3

3 3 3

2 3 2

approach) 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 3

1 3 1

22 25 22

ECODIS EDIT

2 (?) 3 (Europe and beyond)

1 2

2 2

2 2

2 1

2 2

EPROCOT

3 (Europe and beyond) 2 3 (mainly EU)

ESTTAL EUMON

2 2

2 (data availability might be a problem) 2 3

2 (sound science) 3 (sound science as a basis for decisionmaking) 2

1 2

16 20

16

2 2

2 2

1 2

1 2

EUR-OCEANS EUROLIMPACS (not assessed during the first round)

3 (Europe) 3 (Europe)

3 3

2 2 (data availability?)

3 3

3 3

2 3

3 2

2 2 (high awarenessraising potential due to amateur involvement) 3 (sound science; KM) 3 (ecosystem, approach)

1 2

15 20

2 2

24 24

33

Project/criteria

1 geographic coverage

2 extent

3 Applicable outside Europe 2 (data availability?) 3

4 Holistic approach

5 Consequences for existing policies 2 3 (deep-sea resource use)

EVOLTREE EXOCET/D

FACEIT FISH & CHIPS GLOCHAMORE HABIT HERMES

3 (panEurope) 2 (test conducted in the mid Atlantic) 3 (Europe) 2 3 (global) 2 3 (European)

2 2

3 2

6 Requiring new policy action 2 2

7 High innovation potential

8 Fits into UNEP MTS

9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities

10 Supports Green Economy 1 1

Total score

2 3 (tested new research technology) 2 3 2 1 2

2 2 3 1 3

2 3 3 2 3

2 1 3 2 3 (a good interdisciplinary ecosystem approach) 2

2 1 3 2 3

2 1 3 3 3 (highly policy relevant) 2

2 (sound science) 3 (sound science; ecosystem approach) 2 2 (sound science) 3 2 3 (ecosystem approach)

19 21

2 1 2 1 1

19 16 25 16 24

INTRABIODIV

MACIS

MARBEF

3 (assessment probably global, policy options for EU) 3 (global)

2 (ecosystem approach, sound science) 3 (sound science)

19

22

3 (ecosystem approach, sound science)

23

MARINE GENOMICS

34

Project/criteria

1 geographic coverage

2 extent

3 Applicable outside Europe

4 Holistic approach

5 Consequences for existing policies

6 Requiring new policy action

7 High innovation potential

8 Fits into UNEP MTS

9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities

10 Supports Green Economy

Total score

not further evaluated MODELKEY PROBIOPRISE RIOS not further evaluated RUBICODE SEED SESAME

3 (European basins) 3 (EU)

3 2

2 2

3 2

3 3

3 2

2 3

3 3 (private sector work)

2 3

24 23

3 (Europe) 3 (European waters) 2 (restricted to the southern European seas) 3 (Europe)

3 2 3

3 2 2

3 2 3

3 2 3

3 3 3

2 2 2

3 (ecosystem approach) 2 3 (ecosystem approach; public awareness) 3

2 1 1

25 19 22

SOBIO SoilCritZonenot further evaluated

22

35

Table 2: FP7 projects

Project/criteria 1 geographic coverage 2 extent 3 Applicable outside Europe 2 3 4 Holistic approach 5 Consequences for existing policies 2 2 6 Requiring new policy action 2 2 7 High innovation potential 8 Fits into UNEP MTS 9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities 10 Supports Green Economy 1 1 Total score

BIODIVERSA2 BIOFRESH CONGRESS not further evaluated EBONE ECOFINDERS

3 (Europe) 3 (global)

3 3

3 3

2 1

3 (sound science) 2

21 20

3 (Europe) 3 (Europe)

3 2

2 3

2 2

2 3

2 3

2 2

FunDivEUROPE

3 (Europe)

HighARCS

HUNT

LIFEWATCH LiveDiverse

PALMS

PESI SCALES

2 (sites in three Asian countries) 3 (Europe, 2 African countries) 3 (Europe) 3 (developing world) 2 (NW South America) 3 (Europe) 2 (EU)

3 3

2 3

3 3

1 3

1 3

2 2

2 3

2 3

2 3

2 3

2 3

2 2

SOILSERVICE

3 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 3 (ecosystem approach) 3 (ecosystem approach) 2 3 (ecosystem approach) 3

2 2

21 23

24

24

24

1 3

19 26

21

1 2

18 24

(rural

24

36

Project/criteria

1 geographic coverage

2 extent

3 Applicable outside Europe

4 Holistic approach

5 Consequences for existing policies

6 Requiring new policy action

7 High innovation potential

8 Fits into UNEP MTS

9 Fits into EP & national parliament priorities

10 Supports Green Economy economy)

Total score

STEP

(apparently only very few sites) 3 (Europe)

(ecosystem approach) 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 (ecosystem approach) 2

25

TESS

3 (Europe)

19

37

Annex III: Revision of the criteria

Existing criteria 1. Geographic coverage Comments Could be further refined. In addition, there is some doubt whether this is a useful criterion for assessing projects as whether the geographic coverage is useful might depend on the nature of the project. Could be combined with criterion 4. Was found difficult to apply. Many projects would face problems outside Europe due to lack of data and research facilities. This was found very useful; mirrors the ecosystem approach for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. Criterion 2 could be subsumed here. Was found very useful. Suggested revised criteria Geographic coverage: EU, panEurope, beyond Europe

2. 3.

4.

Extent of studies (thematic, policy level) European project with results applicable and transferable outside Europe Holistic, system-level approach

See criterion 4 Project results could environmental policy Europe Same support outside

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

Problem has high potential consequences on existing policies New problems or challenges that require new policy action Problem has high innovation potential Fits well into UNEP Mid Term Strategy and the priority areas of programme of work and so, adds to the critical mass of knowledge Fits well into EP priorities and individual EU national parliament priorities

Same

Was found very useful. Could be worded slightly differently. Was found very useful. Could be worded slightly differently. Was found useful although as the biodiversity priorities of the UNEP MTS are worded rather generically, most projects scored highly here. Due to the lack of information on EP and national parliament priorities, this criterion was not applied. Was found very useful.

Project results in the identification of problems or challenges that require new policy action Project results have a high innovation potential Same

10. Project results will support Green Economy, i.e. could lead to substantial number of jobs and, in general, promote environmental sustainability 11.

Same

A new criterion 11 is suggested.

Project details including results are easily available and well presented on the web.

38

39