Financing biodiversity management
Published (reviewed and quality assured)
Justification for indicator selection
MAIN ADVANTAGES OF THE INDICATOR
- Policy relevance: The level and development through time of financial means for Biodiversity management from the EU budget is immediately perceptible, and is the direct outcome of policy decisions.
- Biodiversity relevance: specifically indicates spending on biodiversity.
- No rationale references available
The indicator is a compilation of the value for the specific types of expenditure for biodiversity from the EU budget. Once this value has been obtained, it can then be expressed as a ratio in terms of the overall EU budget, in addition to its expression in absolute terms, which would be calculated in reference to an initial value for the euro to be determined as the baseline expenditure for biodiversity.
Income foregone as a result of any of the above circumstances is also a value that has to be included in the calculation as far as this is compensated from the EU budget.
The EU processes at present do not provide readily/publicly available data which breaks down their expenditure -- so it is, for instance, not possible to find out what proportion of the agri-environment budget has been spent on biodiversity. However, this data can be made available in future, at which point a baseline year can be chosen and accommodation made for the expansion of the EU and associated changes in budget streams.
No units have been specified
Policy context and targets
The purpose of the indicator for financing biodiversity management is to obtain a value that embraces both what has been done in favour of biodiversity as well as what that has not been done, the latter in order to avoid damage to biodiversity. Considering what has not been done refers, inter alia, to the legislation that specifically prohibits action, and that subsequently may entail income foregone for a party thus constrained. To simplify, these two categories of action are addressed separately.
Actions to maintain and enhance biodiversity
The expenditure that is normally considered as beneficial for biodiversity should:
1. add to the territory that is reserved for nature conservation;
2. manage the territory that has been set aside for nature conservation;
3. promote conservation measures to maintain and restore nature generally, including research;
4. protect the diurnal or seasonal migration pathways for species;
5. regulate land use, when the corresponding impacts are positive for the state of biodiversity.
Actions to protect and restore biodiversity
The expenditure that is associated with avoiding (continued) harm to biodiversity should:
1. compensate for past or future disruption to the state of natural habitats;
2. reintroduce species in a habitat where their numbers have declined below a satisfactory level for maintaining a viable population or community;
3. forbid certain uses of biodiversity (notably species capture - in all manners - or harvesting);
4. monitor species population levels and area of natural habitat;
5. regulate land use, when the corresponding impacts would have been negative for the state of biodiversity; these include cross-compliance measures applied to agricultural (and forestry) practices.
Income foregone as a result of any of the above circumstances is also a value that has to be included in the calculation, as far as this is compensated from the EU budget.
Within the EU budget, the appropriate budget lines are:
Title 05 -- agriculture
05 04 01 07 -- agri-environment (former system)
05 04 01 08 -- agri-environment (new system)
Title 07 -- environment
07 03 03 01 -- LIFE III (nature protection)
07 03 03 02 -- Natura 2000 preparatory action
Relation of the indicator to the focal area
Biodiversity funding at the EU level is an indication of the relative and absolute degree of resource transfer from the public sector for the benefit of maintaining or enhancing the state of biodiversity, or to avoid damage and disruption to ecological conditions.
No targets have been specified
Related policy documents
No related policy documents have been specified
Methodology for indicator calculation
Analysis of Titles, Chapters, Articles and Items.
To be tested with real data.
It remains to be decided how baseline expenditure is being determined, what year is chosen, and how the indicator takes into account the expansion of the EU and the budget, if for the baseline year a year is chosen before 2004/2007.
Methodology for gap filling
No methodology for gap filling has been specified. Probably this info has been added together with indicator calculation.
No methodology references available.
EEA data references
- No datasets have been specified here.
Data sources in latest figures
No uncertainty has been specified
Data sets uncertainty
No uncertainty has been specified
MAIN DISADVANTAGES OF THE INDICATOR
- The indicator presents only EU budget financed activities. National contributions (which are for example in the Netherlands up to 85 % of the total expenditure) are not included. The picture is thus far from complete.
- The construction of the indicator from elements in the EU budget runs up against the lack of direct relationship between a budget line and the particular aspect of the indicator being investigated. Each of the EU budget lines retained, for instance, may cover several of the aspects of the indicator; conversely, some aspects may be covered in a budget line that is not easily identified for its relevance for biodiversity financing.
ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS
No other indicator was available at this stage.
Short term work
Work specified here requires to be completed within 1 year from now.
Long term work
Work specified here will require more than 1 year (from now) to be completed.
Work descriptionSUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Include national expenditure as well as private donations. Work is ongoing on a coding system that will determine EU Member State spending levels on biodiversity. In addition, more detailed information will be provided on other funding instruments such as the agro-environment schemes, broader rural development, also including Natura 2000 payments, Structural Funds, RTD, and LIFE+. The improvement of the indicator depends on more accurate accounting system within the EU that would allow tracking the disbursement of funds according to the legal instrument authorising the activity. According to the EU Headline Indicator, resource transfers also need to be included (funding to biodiversity in economic and development cooperation).
No resource needs have been specified
Deadline2099/01/01 00:00:00 GMT+1
Responsibility and ownership
EEA Contact InfoKatarzyna Biala
For references, please go to www.eea.europa.eu/soer or scan the QR code.
This briefing is part of the EEA's report The European Environment - State and Outlook 2015. The EEA is an official agency of the EU, tasked with providing information on Europe’s environment.
PDF generated on 27 Jan 2015, 08:46 PM