Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments

Background The European Union strives to increase protected areas of the EU terrestrial surface to 30% by year 2030, of which one third should be strictly protected. Designation of the Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an expert-opinion process with little...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Iulia V. Miu, Laurentiu Rozylowicz, Viorel D. Popescu, Paulina Anastasiu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2020-09-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/10067.pdf
id doaj-0686198334124a15a53898df83f89424
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0686198334124a15a53898df83f894242020-11-25T03:28:37ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592020-09-018e1006710.7717/peerj.10067Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitmentsIulia V. Miu0Laurentiu Rozylowicz1Viorel D. Popescu2Paulina Anastasiu3Center for Environmental Research, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, RomaniaCenter for Environmental Research, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, RomaniaCenter for Environmental Research, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, RomaniaDimitrie Brândză Botanical Garden, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, RomaniaBackground The European Union strives to increase protected areas of the EU terrestrial surface to 30% by year 2030, of which one third should be strictly protected. Designation of the Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an expert-opinion process with little systematic conservation planning. The designation of the Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic approach, resulting in a suboptimal representation of invertebrates and plants. To help identify areas with very high biodiversity without repeating past planning missteps, we present a reproducible example of spatial prioritization using Romania’s current terrestrial Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale terrestrial species occurrence. Methods We used 371 terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance (Natura 2000 SCI), designated to protect 164 terrestrial species listed under Annex II of Habitats Directive in Romania in our spatial prioritization analyses (marine Natura 2000 sites and species were excluded). Species occurrences in terrestrial Natura 2000 sites were aggregated at a Universal Traverse Mercator spatial resolution of 1 km2. To identify priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites for species conservation, and to explore if the Romanian Natura 2000 network sufficiently represents species included in Annex II of Habitats Directive, we used Zonation v4, a decision support software tool for spatial conservation planning. We carried out the analyses nationwide (all Natura 2000 sites) as well as separately for each biogeographic region (i.e., Alpine, Continental, Pannonian, Steppic and Black Sea). Results The results of spatial prioritization of terrestrial Natura 2000 vary greatly by planning scenario. The performance of national-level planning of top priorities is minimal. On average, when 33% of the landscape of Natura 2000 sites is protected, only 20% of the distribution of species listed in Annex II of Habitats Directive are protected. As a consequence, the representation of species by priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites is lessened when compared to the initial set of species. When planning by taxonomic group, the top-priority areas include only 10% of invertebrate distribution in Natura 2000. When selecting top-priority areas by biogeographical region, there are significantly fewer gap species than in the national level and by taxa scenarios; thusly, the scenario outperforms the national-level prioritization. The designation of strictly protected areas as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 should be followed by setting clear objectives, including a good representation of species and habitats at the biogeographical region level.https://peerj.com/articles/10067.pdfProtected areasSpatial prioritizationBiogeographic regionsDesignation of strictly protected areasSystematic conservation planningNatura 2000
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Iulia V. Miu
Laurentiu Rozylowicz
Viorel D. Popescu
Paulina Anastasiu
spellingShingle Iulia V. Miu
Laurentiu Rozylowicz
Viorel D. Popescu
Paulina Anastasiu
Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
PeerJ
Protected areas
Spatial prioritization
Biogeographic regions
Designation of strictly protected areas
Systematic conservation planning
Natura 2000
author_facet Iulia V. Miu
Laurentiu Rozylowicz
Viorel D. Popescu
Paulina Anastasiu
author_sort Iulia V. Miu
title Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
title_short Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
title_full Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
title_fullStr Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
title_full_unstemmed Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments
title_sort identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the eu biodiversity strategy for 2030 key commitments
publisher PeerJ Inc.
series PeerJ
issn 2167-8359
publishDate 2020-09-01
description Background The European Union strives to increase protected areas of the EU terrestrial surface to 30% by year 2030, of which one third should be strictly protected. Designation of the Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an expert-opinion process with little systematic conservation planning. The designation of the Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic approach, resulting in a suboptimal representation of invertebrates and plants. To help identify areas with very high biodiversity without repeating past planning missteps, we present a reproducible example of spatial prioritization using Romania’s current terrestrial Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale terrestrial species occurrence. Methods We used 371 terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance (Natura 2000 SCI), designated to protect 164 terrestrial species listed under Annex II of Habitats Directive in Romania in our spatial prioritization analyses (marine Natura 2000 sites and species were excluded). Species occurrences in terrestrial Natura 2000 sites were aggregated at a Universal Traverse Mercator spatial resolution of 1 km2. To identify priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites for species conservation, and to explore if the Romanian Natura 2000 network sufficiently represents species included in Annex II of Habitats Directive, we used Zonation v4, a decision support software tool for spatial conservation planning. We carried out the analyses nationwide (all Natura 2000 sites) as well as separately for each biogeographic region (i.e., Alpine, Continental, Pannonian, Steppic and Black Sea). Results The results of spatial prioritization of terrestrial Natura 2000 vary greatly by planning scenario. The performance of national-level planning of top priorities is minimal. On average, when 33% of the landscape of Natura 2000 sites is protected, only 20% of the distribution of species listed in Annex II of Habitats Directive are protected. As a consequence, the representation of species by priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites is lessened when compared to the initial set of species. When planning by taxonomic group, the top-priority areas include only 10% of invertebrate distribution in Natura 2000. When selecting top-priority areas by biogeographical region, there are significantly fewer gap species than in the national level and by taxa scenarios; thusly, the scenario outperforms the national-level prioritization. The designation of strictly protected areas as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 should be followed by setting clear objectives, including a good representation of species and habitats at the biogeographical region level.
topic Protected areas
Spatial prioritization
Biogeographic regions
Designation of strictly protected areas
Systematic conservation planning
Natura 2000
url https://peerj.com/articles/10067.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT iuliavmiu identificationofareasofveryhighbiodiversityvaluetoachievetheeubiodiversitystrategyfor2030keycommitments
AT laurentiurozylowicz identificationofareasofveryhighbiodiversityvaluetoachievetheeubiodiversitystrategyfor2030keycommitments
AT vioreldpopescu identificationofareasofveryhighbiodiversityvaluetoachievetheeubiodiversitystrategyfor2030keycommitments
AT paulinaanastasiu identificationofareasofveryhighbiodiversityvaluetoachievetheeubiodiversitystrategyfor2030keycommitments
_version_ 1724583083110301696