In order to succeed in their conservation objectives and enhance the resilience of marine ecosystems against climate change, Marine Protected Areas must be effectively managed. This requires, amongst other actions, integrating climate change effects into their management plans and involving stakeholders at all levels and stages. Discover the actions of EUROPARC and the Interreg Euro-MED MPA4Change Project towards this goal, in our new article.
The Mediterranean Sea is rapidly warming, and this increase in temperature is leading to unwanted changes in marine ecosystems. Additionally, the anthropogenic impacts derived from activities such as fishing, tourism, extraction, pollution and others are contributing to decreased resilience of key marine ecosystems and species, especially those more vulnerable, and therefore jeopardizing its preservation.
As a countermeasure, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) play an important role in enhancing the resilience and adaptive capacity of ecosystems. They protect the ecosystems by reducing risks, anthropogenic impacts and other non-climate related stressors. Furthermore, they offer a range of nature-based solutions, providing benefits to our society as well as natural solutions to mitigate climate change impacts, and can act as sentinel sites to monitor its effects.
Additionally, and according to the Policy Paper published in the framework of MPA Engage, a prequel of the MPA4Change project, there is increasing evidence supporting that MPAs that ignore climate change effects risk establishing conservation targets that are unlikely to be achieved, since these effects are strongly shifting trends in the marine ecosystems they are trying to protect.
Nonetheless, despite the importance of integrating climate change adaptation measures into MPA planning and management, as well as into policy, the uptake of these measures needs to be well coordinated and they require that MPAs follow adaptive management schemes to be effective.
To achieve effective management, decisions cannot be taken at MPA level without considering stakeholders at all levels. For this reason, establishing partnerships with local communities, decision makers, research bodies, socio-economic actors and other interest groups is a cornerstone of the effectiveness of MPAs and therefore of their resilience and capacity to adapt to environmental changes and withstand climate change.
EUROPARC’s efforts to improve management effectiveness in Marine Protected Areas
In 2024, EUROPARC Federation as the bigger network of Protected Area professionals in Europe, organised a dedicated event in Northern Germany, the Siggen Seminar 2024 – Catching the wave: How can we achieve more effective management in Marine Protected Areas?
The seminar gathered ten experts in marine conservation, including MPA managers, management effectiveness consultants and representatives of conservation agencies and ministries. During it, they had the opportunity to discuss and exchange on key aspects that need to be tackled in order to improve management effectiveness and its assessment in MPAs in Europe.
Participants during Siggen Seminar 2024 – Photo by EUROPARC Federation
The topic is known to be a tricky one to address, especially because general answers to improve management effectiveness seem difficult to find. Furthermore, it entails complex questions that are often case specific and are driven by the varied reality of management schemes, political and socio-economic features of MPAs in our continent.
However, some noteworthy considerations were obtained during the Siggen Seminar. For example, the assessment of management effectiveness is considered to be a key element to improve management practices, understand the impact of management plans, compare results and communicate them to the local communities.
Additionally, it is also perceived as a non-standardised process that tends to be carried out in different styles, for different purposes, by different people, which makes it difficult to replicate across MPA networks.
During the Seminar, other aspects were identified as priority in order to achieve effective MPA management: the need to have clear conservation objectives, the involvement of stakeholders in all stages of the design and implementation of MPA plans, and the enforcement of the regulations.
Improving management effectiveness through MPA4Change
In line with this work, the partnership of MPA4change will soon make a set of toolkits aimed to support MPAs in achieving a more effective management available. These toolkits include protocols on citizen science and participation that aim to facilitate the involvement of stakeholders in the management of an MPA.
As identified both during the Siggen Seminar, as well as in the Policy Paper published by MPA Engage, stakeholder involvement is apriority to improve management effectiveness and climate change adaption in MPAs. For this reason, we encourage all MPA managers interested in achieving greater conservation outcomes and improving the resilience of their MPAs to take a close look at these resources.
Additionally, the toolkits will include communication materials aiming to raise awareness on climate change and the importance of adaptation, as well as specific protocols for monitoring its impacts, assess the vulnerability of an MPA, draft adaptation measures and carrying out restoration actions.
The MPA4Change project is funded by Interreg Euro-MED.
Interested in Management Effectiveness in Marine Protected Areas? Then be sure to save the date for the first ever EUROPARC e-Forum on exactly that topic! Taking place online on the 7th of November.
Learn about the experience of our Interreg Volunteer Youth Anna!
Published on:
Image: GREENHEALTH group photo at the Acres Lake Board Walk in County Leitrim, Ireland.
For the first time in our history, EUROPARC hosted an Interreg Volunteer Youth (IVY) for our GREENHEALTH project. Learn more about her experience in this article!
Article written by Anna Di Cecco.
About IVY
My name is Anna Di Cecco and I had the opportunity to spend a semester as an IVY in the GREENHEALTH Interreg project, collaborating with EUROPARC.
The “Interreg Volunteer Youth” (IVY) is an initiative of the European Commission, which represents a unique opportunity for young people who want to impact the world we live in. It aims at promoting cooperation by supporting Interreg projects and programs, making cooperation visible, and empowering youth.
In the GREENHEALTH project, EUROPARC covers the role of advisory partner for communication and capacity building. In this role, EUROPARC and the Healthy Parks Healthy People Europe Commission provide topical expertise through the use of the HPHPe Toolkit. The latter serves as a methodological compass to identify good practices and areas that can help support public health and conservation outcomes through the appropriate use of natural assets.
The final goal of the project is to improve regional public policies and to create the right regional contexts to maximize the links between Protected Areas and health and well-being.
I was in charge of the communication and dissemination activities of GREENHEALTH, both through our project’s website and our social media channels. I applied for this opportunity because I was interested in discovering how an Interreg project works from the inside. In addition, I grew up in a Protected Area and I am passionate about sustainable development and nature conservation and restoration. Thus, having the chance to be part of the EUROPARC team has been very inspiring and empowering.
During my IVY experience, I had the opportunity to learn more about how Protected Areas work and why they are so important for nature restoration and conservation. I have met many people from different backgrounds and learned from their expertise.
I also had the chance to travel, visit natural areas involved in the project, and learn on the ground, both from partners and stakeholders.
Looking back at the time spent here, I am grateful to the EUROPARC team for how I have been welcomed into the office life, making me feel at home from the first day. This experience has given me new skills, new competencies, and beautiful memories, thanks to the people who have been with me during my time in Regensburg.
I would suggest this experience to every young person who wants to explore cooperation and local development while acquiring new skills, both at personal and professional levels. It is also a great experience to participate in heterogeneous EUROPARC activities, which touch every aspect of Protected Areas management and nature conservation, from sustainable tourism to health, climate change, and much more.
Interested in joining the EUROPARC Team? Keep an eye on our job vacancies page here.
European Day of Parks 2024 – discover what was happening on and offline!
Published on:
Every year, on the 24th of May, EUROPARC celebrates the European Day of Park (EDoP). All over Europe, the Protected Area community organises events and raises attention to their value for society. This year’s theme was “Vote for Nature”. Discover all that was happening across Europe, on and offline, in our brand-new report!
EDoP 2024: a massive success
Thanks to the support of our members and partners on the ground, the European Day of Parks was once again a big success! The European day of Parks (EDoP) aims at bringing people closer to nature by offering a diversity of activities and events in Protected Areas across the EUROPARC Network. From Spain to Sweden and from England to Ukraine: events were happening all over Europe. Under the theme “Vote for Nature” we raised awareness about the importance of Protected Areas for the successful implementation of nature policies in Europe.
Some core numbers from our EDoP 2024 outreach!
Vote for nature – bring policy decision to life!
Protected Areas are builders of bridges. These special places are able to connect international policy decisions and agreements with local communities. Furthermore, they are essential not just for the successful execution of these policies, but also to help shape wide-spread acceptance amongst citizens. EUROPARC asked Parks and Protected Areas to organise events to showcase how they are bringing policy decision to life. The Protected Area community answered with 100s of events all over Europe.
Social media was buzzing!
Parks and Protected Areas also joined in online, to ensure that our message was heard by as many people as possible. Thanks to a special Social Media Pack created by the EUROPARC Federation, this was easier than ever before. The result? Thousands of people interacted with #EuropeanDayofParks content. We could hardly keep up with the many posts and stories that were created by our community! All this activity created a big multiplier effect, bringing attention to the essential work of Parks and Protected Areas all over Europe.
Want to learn more about the activities, the outreach and the numbers? Then check out our activities and outreach report:
Photo by Aydin Hassan on Unsplash. Design EUROPARC.
Published on:
The EUROPARC Federation is an active participant in the EU Natura 2000 Biogeographical Seminars. In this article, our president Michael Hošek summarises results from the last two seminars held in Cyprus (April 2024 for the Mediterranean region) and Czechia (June 2024 for several regions), as well as the status of pledges made by EU Member states for the EU Biodiversity Targets 2030. Continue reading to discover the immediate challenges and tasks for nature conservation in the European Union!
EU Biodiversity Targets 2030 – where are we now?
Article written by Michael Hošek.
Role of EUROPARC members in pledges planning and implementation
The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 fundamentally changed conservation goals by covering not just Natura 2000, but all Protected Areas. It also changed the way we define targets and how to reach them. As such, the manner of our coordination must adapt accordingly.
EUROPARC’s diverse network of members covers those responsible for national strategies (mainly ministries or regional governments), but is also largely made up of managers of Protected Areas who are responsible for practical conservation measures. This article is primarily aimed at the latter, because even though they are not directly involved in the process of pledge development, it is the nature managers that will later be affected by pledges in terms of implementation and outcomes. Furthermore, their contribution to achieving these pledges will be significant. In this article, I will assess how current planning to achieve the 2030 conservation targets are evolving and how nature managers can contribute.
EU Biodiversity pledges 2030 – what are they about?
Although we talk about them regularly, ‘the pledges’ might still be unclear for some of us. Therefore, let me shortly refresh our memories.
The EU has a set of targets for biodiversity protection by 2030, called the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. These targets are ambitious and aim to reverse the damage done to Europe’s natural habitats and species. They are in line with the global targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), which the EU and all its Member States have also signed.
One of the key aspects of this strategy is the commitment to Protected Areas. EU countries have pledged to protect at least 30% of Europe’s land and sea by 2030 with at least one-third of that area (10% of land and sea) being strictly protected. This means that these areas will have the highest level of safeguards to preserve their natural state, but it does not mean only a non-intervention approach. If there is a need for active measures to support biodiversity, they are allowed, of course.
Another target is to improve the conservation status of species and habitats. By 2030, EU countries want to see at least 30% of species and habitats that are currently not in good condition improve to a favourable status, or at least show a significant positive trend in that direction.
These pledges are voluntary, but EU Member States were supposed to submit plans in 2023 outlining how they would achieve these goals. However, almost all countries missed this deadline.
Those of us who experienced the so-called Natura 2000 Biogeographical Process before 2012 remember that it was purely a technical discussion about the completeness of Natura 2000 in one specific EU country. However, the purpose of this process has changed significantly. Currently, one of its aims is to take stock of the pledges that Member States in a Biogeographical Region have submitted, in the context of the objectives and targets of the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and those of the GBF of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). In other words, it is the only tool to discuss pledges with Member States and between them, in particular regions, at the technical level.
The overall goal of the Biogeographical Process is to help EU Member States effectively implement and manage the Natura 2000 network and their nationally designated Protected Areas as a coherent ecological network, in line with the EU Biodiversity Strategy targets.
There is another specific reason why EU countries meet and discuss within the same region. As we know, nature does not care about our man-made borders. Achieving the targets is necessary from a conservation perspective at the bioregional level, not strictly separated by individual states. As such, if countries agree amongst themselves, it is possible to share the responsibility of meeting the targets. Concretely, this means that within a biogeographical region, if one country is able to preserve less nature than required, a ‘partner country’ can increase their natural spaces to compensate.
What can we read in the already submitted pledges?
Of the 27 EU Member States, only 7 have submitted pledges on Protected Areas targets. As the agreement to do so is voluntary, the European Commission does not have any legal tool to push states. Nonetheless, countries utilise the preparation of pledges as a vehicle for their internal discussions and conceptual planning. Therefore, it is supposed that the majority of all countries will prepare and share pledges, though with delay. The Member States are also preparing their new National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) for the CBD to align them with the new GBF. The pledge process is a good tool for Member States to work on their targets for their NBSAPs.
Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of the current pledges proposed promise only a minimal increase of Protected Areas, and no pledges propose reaching 30% of the land area by 2030. The explanation is simple: No one waited until now to declare areas of value. What was valuable and essential to the national system has, in principle, already been declared. Though there are still areas that are worth designating (both for the purpose of conservation and restoration), those do not help with reaching 30% in the majority of cases.
The only exception is the Czech Republic, which is proposing a substantial increase in areas through newly designated or declared Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs). However, this is also a novelty for Czech nature conservation and needs to be further discussed – at the national level and with the European Commission.
What tools do we have to reach the pledges?
Expansion of Protected Areas (unitedly Natura 2000 and nationally designated Protected Areas) to cover 30% of Europe – the so-called 30×30 goal. However, the situation in Europe varies greatly. Some countries have already reached this proportion, while others do not have the natural conditions to do so. This is where an agreement between states on the possible sharing of pledges is appropriate. The target is 30% at the EU level and at each biogeographical region.
Part of the 30×30 target is that 1/3 of the Protected Areas (10% of the EU land and sea) will be strictly protected. What does that mean? In these areas, no activities should be allowed besides those benefiting the Protected Area conservation objectives. Such measures can be non-intervention as well as active management, which is necessary to maintain or improve biodiversity. To define which Protected Areas should be strictly protected and in what way, practical experience of nature managers is needed.
OECMs – Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. These are a new tool for us in Europe (but also globally), which is why their definition is being clarified for the European context. You can read more about them here. In principle, their purpose should be filling the “sharp boundary” between Protected Areas and our competences in them, as opposed to the unprotected landscape, in which, on the contrary, nature conservation often has no tools at all. However, it should be clear that OECMs are defined as a type of Protected Area. An interesting and still not closed discussion is whether OECMs can serve as a tool for strict protection. The basic point is that these are “schemes” that are not a priori nature managers’ activity, but that of our partners – farmers, foresters, and others who manage the landscape – that have voluntarily chosen to do so sustainably. It is agreed that there is a need for EU-specific guidelines for the OECMs definition.
These examples are the most important points among many others, such as creating a functional Protected Areas Management Effectiveness system. A project to develop a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of Protected Areas will be launched by EUROPARC in September. Of course, I also warmly invite you to save the date for our e-Forum on the 7th of November, which also focuses on Management Effectiveness.
The approval of the EU Nature Restoration Law(NRL) makes a significant difference in the entire strategic approach and can become an additional, important, tool. The NRL is a regulation. This means it creates binding legislation directly applicable to all EU member states. There is no need for the countries to translate it into national law, unlike Directives, which set goals, but allow some flexibility in achieving them. Therefore, it is possible to read and interpret the text in terms of application and national perspectives directly. Nonetheless, its text provides scope for a modified approach that takes account of national circumstances. The European Commission itself is now defining its approach in this respect.
But what is the NRL likely to change? How will national pledges be defined? While the part about Protected Areas (30×30 target) is not strongly affected by the NRL, the pledge about the improvement of the conservation status of species and habitats might be replaced by the NRL implementation. That is a fundamental question that is going to be answered in the upcoming months.
We can consider the approval of the NRL as a great victory, but we must not forget the stakeholders – especially landscape managers (farmers, foresters, fishermen and others). They often express fear and feel they were not invited to contribute to its development.
The NRL is a strong legislation in its objectives and instruments. Although many argue it is weaker because of compromises made during its adoption, I still consider it an ambitious and powerful instrument. However, the detailed roadmap for its implementation will be defined in the coming months, and this only encourages stakeholders (i.e. our partners) to be uncertain whether the NRL will be enforced too hard or without appropriate agreements. This fear of uncertainty must not be underestimated because it is relevant. We have a chance to turn it into collaboration.
What is now needed above all?
Most countries have still not sent their pledges to the European Commission and time is running out, with only 6 years until 2030. We should therefore try to achieve the targets now, because we know what is needed in principle, and we know how to achieve them, both strategically and practically.
EUROPARC contributes to this not only by developing a methodology for management effectiveness, but also by consulting with individual countries and bodies. Any of our members who want to contribute to this discussion or be informed are welcome to participate
