Communication from the Commission - Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 - and beyond - Sustaining ecosystem services for human well-being {SEC(2006) 607} {SEC(2006) 621}
Date: 2006-05-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, biodiversity, environmental protection, management of resources, natural resources, sustainable development

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 22.5.2006 
COM(2006) 216 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

HALTING THE LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY BY 2010 — AND BEYOND 
Sustaining ecosystem services for human well–being 

{SEC(2006) 607} 
{SEC(2006) 621} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Why is biodiversity important? .................................................................................... 4 

What is happening to biodiversity and why? ............................................................... 5 

What have we done so far and how effective has it been?........................................... 6 

What more needs to be done?..................................................................................... 10 

ANNEX 1: EU Action Plan to 2010 and Beyond 

ANNEX 2: EU Biodiversity Headline Indicators 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Over recent decades, humanity has benefited enormously from development1, which has 
enriched  our  lives.  However,  much  of  this  development  has  been  associated  with  a 
decline in both the variety and extent of natural systems — of biodiversity.2 This loss of 
biodiversity,  at  the  levels  of  ecosystems,  species  and  genes,  is  of  concern  not  just 
because of the important intrinsic value of nature, but also because it results in a decline 
in  ‘ecosystem  services’  which  natural  systems  provide.  These  services  include 
production  of  food,  fuel,  fibre  and  medicines,  regulation  of  water,  air  and  climate, 
maintenance  of  soil  fertility,  cycling  of  nutrients.  In  this  context  concern  for 
biodiversity is integral to sustainable development and underpins competitivity, growth 
and employment, and improved livelihoods. 

The  recent  Millennium  Ecosystem  Assessment  (MA)3  launched  by  the  UN  Secretary 
General highlighted that most such services are in decline, both in the EU and globally. 
The bottom line, it said, is that we are spending the Earth’s natural capital and putting at 
risk the ability of ecosystems to sustain future generations. We can reverse the decline, 
but only with substantial changes in policy and practice. 

The  EU  has  made  significant  commitments  in  this  regard.  EU  Heads  of  State  or 
Government agreed in 2001 “to halt the decline of biodiversity [in the EU] by 2010”4 
and  to  “restore  habitats  and  natural  systems”5.  In  2002,  they  joined  some  130  world 
leaders  in  agreeing  “to  significantly  reduce  the  rate  of  biodiversity  loss  [globally]  by 
2010”6. Opinion polls show that these concerns for nature and biodiversity are strongly 
supported by EU citizens7. 

At  Community  level,  the  policy  framework  to  halt  biodiversity  loss  in  the  EU  is  now 
largely in place. Biodiversity objectives are, for example, integrated in the Sustainable 
Development Strategy (SDS)8 and the Lisbon partnership for growth and jobs and in a 
wide  range  of  environmental  and  sector  policies.  An  EC  Biodiversity  Strategy9  was 
adopted  in  1998  and  related  Action  Plans10  in  2001.  Most  Member  States  have  also 
developed, or are developing, such strategies and/or action plans. 

While  important  progress  has  been  made  and  there  are  first  signs  of  slowing  rates  of 
loss,  the  pace  and  extent  of  implementation  has  been  insufficient.  Much  of  our 
biodiversity remains greatly impoverished and continues to decline. Achievement of the 
2010  target  is  still  possible  but  will  require  accelerated  implementation  at  both 
Community and Member State levels. 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

See, e.g. Human Development Index trends, in UNDP Human Development Report 2005 
CBD Secretariat (2006) Global Biodiversity Outlook 2. 
http://www.maweb.org 
Presidency Conclusions, Göteborg European Council 15 and 16 June 2001 
COM (2001) 264 final 
World Summit for Sustainable Development, Plan of Implementation 
Special Eurobarometer 217 (2005) 
COM (2001) 264 final 
COM (1998) 42 final 
COM (2001) 162 final 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Two  particular  threats  to  EU  biodiversity  are  highlighted.  First,  that  of  ill-considered 
land  use  and  development.  Member  States  have  particular  responsibility,  through 
improved planning, to reconcile land use and development needs with the conservation 
of biodiversity and maintenance of ecosystem services. Second, the increasing impact of 
climate  change  on  biodiversity.  This  reinforces  the  imperative  for  effective  action  on 
greenhouse  gas  emissions  beyond  the  Kyoto  Protocol  targets.  We  must  also  support 
biodiversity adaptation to climate change, while ensuring that climate change adaptation 
and mitigation measures are not themselves harmful to biodiversity. 

Worldwide, progress is not encouraging. There is real risk of failure to meet the global 
2010 target. The EU shares responsibility for this. Our lifestyles rely heavily on imports 
from developing countries, the production and transport of which may often accelerate 
loss of biodiversity. If we are to make a difference, we must establish our credibility by 
protecting  EU  biodiversity,  while  redoubling  our  efforts  to  protect  global  biodiversity 
through development assistance, trade relations and international governance. 

This Communication outlines the extent of the problem and reviews the adequacy of the 
EU response so far. It then identifies key policy areas for action, and related objectives 
and  supporting  measures  to  deliver  the  2010  targets  and  put  biodiversity  on  course  to 
recovery.  These  are  translated  into  specific  targets  and  actions  in  the  annexed  “EU 
Action Plan to 2010 and Beyond.” This is addressed to both Community institutions and 
Member States and specifies the responsibilities of each in order to pull together action. 
The  Plan  is  based  on,  and  strongly  supported  by,  wide–ranging  expert  and  public 
consultation. 

Finally, halting biodiversity loss by 2010 is not an end–point in itself. The Commission 
intends to launch a debate on a longer–term vision within which to frame future policy 
— on the kind of nature we want in the EU, and on the EU’s role in safeguarding nature 
worldwide. 

2. 

WHY IS BIODIVERSITY IMPORTANT? 

Does  it  matter  if  we  drive  more  and  more  species  to  extinction?  Cannot  human 
ingenuity and technology substitute for lost ecosystem services? 

For many, the loss of species and natural habitats matters because they take an ethical 
view that we do not have the right to decide the fate of nature. More tangibly nature is 
valued for the pleasure and inspiration it provides. While this value can be difficult to 
quantify, it provides a basis for much of our tourism and recreation industries.  

From  an  economic  perspective,  biodiversity  provides  benefits  for  present  and  future 
generations  by  way  of  ecosystem  services.  These  services  include  production  of  food, 
fuel,  fibre  and  medicines,  regulation  of  water,  air  and  climate,  maintenance  of  soil 
fertility,  cycling  of  nutrients.  It  is  difficult  to  put  precise  monetary  values  on  these 
services worldwide, but estimates suggest they are in the order of hundreds of billions 
of  Euros  per  year.  These  services  underpin  EU  growth,  jobs  and  wellbeing.  In 
developing  countries,  they  are  vital  to  achievement  of  the  Millennium  Development 
Goals. Yet according to the MA, some two-thirds of ecosystem services worldwide are 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
in  decline,  compromised  by  over–use  and  loss  of  the  species  richness  which  ensures 
their stability. 

Evidence of this decline is seen, for example, in collapsing fish stocks, widespread loss 
of  soil  fertility,  crashes  in  pollinator  populations  and  reduced  floodwater  retention 
capacity  of  our  rivers.  There  is  a  limit  to  the  extent  to  which  human  ingenuity  and 
technology can substitute for this natural life support system and even when it can, the 
costs frequently exceed those of looking after biodiversity in the first place. Once they 
pass  a  certain  threshold,  ecosystems  are  often  very  difficult  or  impossible  to  restore. 
Extinction  is  forever.  Ultimately,  humanity  cannot  survive  without  this  life  support 
system. 

3. 

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO BIODIVERSITY AND WHY? 

3.1. 

Biodiversity state and trends 

The  MA  found  that  Europe’s  ecosystems  have  suffered  more  human–induced 
fragmentation  than  those  of  any  other  continent.  For  example,  only  1–3%  of  Western 
Europe’s  forests  can  be  classed  as  ‘undisturbed  by  humans’;  since  the  1950s,  Europe 
has lost more than half of its wetlands and most high–nature–value farmland; and many 
of  the  EU’s  marine  ecosystems  are  degraded.  At  the  species  level,  42%  of  Europe’s 
native mammals, 43% of birds, 45% of butterflies, 30% of amphibians, 45% of reptiles 
and  52%  of  freshwater  fish  are  threatened  with  extinction;  most  major  marine  fish 
stocks are below safe biological limits; some 800 plant species in Europe are at risk of 
global  extinction;  and  there  are  unknown  but  potentially  significant  changes  in  lower 
life  forms  including  invertebrate  and  microbial  diversity.  Moreover,  many  once 
common species show population declines. This loss of species and decline in species’ 
abundance is accompanied by significant loss of genetic diversity. 

Worldwide, biodiversity loss is even more alarming.11 Since the late 1970s, an area of 
tropical rain forest larger than the EU has been destroyed, largely for timber, crops such 
as palm oil and soy bean, and cattle ranching; an area equivalent to the size of France is 
destroyed  every  3–4  years.  Other  diverse  ecosystems,  such  as  wetlands,  drylands, 
islands, temperate forests, mangroves and coral reefs, are suffering proportionate losses. 
Species’  extinction  rates  are  now  around  100  times  greater  than  that  shown  in  fossil 
records  and  are  projected  to  accelerate,  threatening  a  new  ‘mass  extinction’  of  a  kind 
not seen since the disappearance of the dinosaurs. 

3.2. 

Pressures and drivers causing biodiversity loss 

The  main  pressures  and  drivers  are  well  known.  The  principal  pressure  is  habitat 
fragmentation,  degradation  and  destruction  due  to  land  use  change  arising,  inter  alia, 
from  conversion,  intensification  of  production  systems,  abandonment  of  traditional 
(often  biodiversity–friendly)  practices,  construction  and  catastrophic  events  including 
fire. Other key pressures are over–exploitation, the spread of invasive alien species and 
pollution.  The  relative  importance  of  these  pressures  varies  from  place  to  place  and, 
very often, several pressures act in concert. 

11 

CBD Secretariat (2006) op. cit. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Worldwide,  two  key  drivers  underlie  these  pressures:  population  growth  and  growing 
per  capita  consumption.  These  drivers  are  set  to  intensify  considerably,  increasing 
pressures  in  particular  on  tropical  forests,  other  tropical  ecosystems  and  mountainous 
ecosystems.  While  these  are  less  important  as drivers  of  EU biodiversity loss,  various 
pressures  are  set  to  increase  in  the  EU,  including  demand  for  housing  and  transport 
infrastructure. 

Other  important  drivers  worldwide  include  governance  failures,  and  the  failure  of 
conventional  economics  to  recognise  the  economic  values  of  natural  capital  and 
ecosystem services. 

Added  to  these  drivers  is  that  of  climate  change,  the  effects  of  which  on  biodiversity 
(such  as  changing  distribution,  migration  and  reproductive  patterns)  are  already 
observable.  In  Europe,  average  temperatures  are  expected  to  rise  by  between  2oC  and 
6.3oC above 1990 temperatures by the year 2100. This would have profound effects on 
biodiversity. 

Finally, globalisation, including European trade, increases pressures on biodiversity and 
ecosystem  services  in  developing  countries  and  the  EU  by,  inter  alia,  increasing 
demands on natural resources, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, and facilitating 
spread of invasive alien species. 

4. 

WHAT HAVE WE DONE SO FAR AND HOW EFFECTIVE HAS IT BEEN? 

This section provides an overview of progress in implementation of the EC Biodiversity 
Strategy  and  Action  Plans,  and  meets  the  requirement  to  report  to  Council  and 
Parliament  in  this  regard.  It  is  based  on  a  review  of  biodiversity  policy  carried  out  in 
2003–04,12 and takes into account subsequent developments. 

4.1. 

The EU approach to biodiversity policy 

The  EU’s  policy  approach  recognises  that  biodiversity  is  not  evenly  spread,  and  that 
certain habitats and species are more at risk than others. Consequently, it affords special 
attention to the creation and protection of a substantial network of sites of highest nature 
value  —  Natura  2000.  However,  the  approach  also  recognises  that  much  biodiversity 
resides  outside  these  sites.  Action  in  the  wider  environment  outside  Natura  2000  is 
provided for by dedicated nature policy (for example, action for threatened species, and 
for  connectivity  of  the  Natura  2000)  and  by  integration  of  biodiversity  needs  into 
agricultural, fisheries and other policies. 

In the international arena, the EU’s focus has been on strengthening the Convention on 
Biological  Diversity  (CBD)  and  other  biodiversity–related  agreements,  pursuing  their 
implementation  and  supporting  biodiversity  through  external  assistance.  The  EU  has 
been  active  in  regulating  unsustainable  trade  in  endangered  species  and  has  promoted 
synergy  between  the  World  Trade  Organisation  and  multilateral  environmental 

12 

Further  details  in  Malahide  conference  ‘audit’  papers,  DG  Environment  on  Europa: 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/biodiversity/develop_biodiversity_policy/malahid
e_conference/index_en.htm 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
agreements.  To  date,  relatively  limited  attention  has  been  given  to  biodiversity  in 
relation to bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. 

4.2. 

Biodiversity in EU internal policy 

4.2.1. 

Safeguarding most important habitats and species 

The  basis  for  EU  action  in  this  regard  is  provided  by  the  Birds13  and  the  Habitats14 
Directives (the ‘nature directives’). While these have not yet been fully implemented in 
all  Member  States,  substantial  progress  has  been  made  towards  designation  of  the 
Natura 2000 network. This consists of sites containing ‘sufficient’ areas of the EU’s 200 
most important habitat types. The network now covers some 18% of the territory of the 
EU–15. Its extension to the EU–10 countries is well advanced. Species–specific action 
plans are proving beneficial for some of the EU’s most endangered species. 

Remaining problems include the absence, as yet, of the Natura 2000 network within the 
marine environment, the damaging impacts of developmental activities on Natura 2000 
sites,  and  the  limited  funds  available  for  effective  site  management  and  supporting 
actions. The full benefits of the network, for biodiversity and ecosystem services, will 
only be felt when these remaining problems are fully addressed. 

The  outermost  regions  and  overseas  countries  and  territories  of  Member  States  are  of 
international importance for biodiversity but most of these areas are not covered by the 
nature directives.15 

4.2.2. 

Integration  of  biodiversity  into  the  SDS,  Lisbon  partnership  for  growth  and 
jobs, and environmental policy 

Biodiversity  conservation  is  a  key  objective  of  the  SDS  and  6th  Environment  Action 
Programme  (6th  EAP)16.  It  has  also  been  recognised  as  an  important  objective  to 
contribute  to  growth  and  jobs  in  the  EU  (two  thirds  of  Member  States  address  this  in 
their Lisbon national reform programmes). Significant progress in environmental policy 
is  yielding  biodiversity  benefits.  The  more  obvious  successes  have  been  in  reducing 
impacts  of  point–source  pollutants,  such  as  those  of  urban  waste  waters  on  ecological 
status of rivers. However, diffuse pollutants, such as airborne eutrophicating pollutants, 
remain  a  significant  pressure.  The  more  recent  framework  directives  and  thematic 
strategies in the areas of water, air, marine, soil, natural resources, urban and pesticides 
(forthcoming) should, when implemented, ensure further progress. 

4.2.3. 

Integration of biodiversity into agricultural and rural development policy 

Agriculture, in managing a large part of the EU territory, conserves genes, species and 
habitats. However, in recent decades, intensification and specialisation, and at the same 
time  marginalisation  and  under–utilisation  of  land,  have  resulted  in  significant 
biodiversity  loss.  The  Common  Agricultural  Policy  (CAP),  together  with  broader 

13 
14 
15 
16 

Directive 79/409/EC, OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p.1  
Directive 92/43/EEC, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7 
Azores, Madeira, Canary Islands are covered  
Decision No 1600/2002/EC, OJ L 242, 10.9.2002, p.1 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
developmental  dynamics  of  the  agricultural  sector,  was  one  of  the  drivers  for  these 
processes,  but  has  since  1992  been  adapted  to  better  integrate  biodiversity  needs. 
Increasing use of agri–environment measures, Good Farming Practice, organic farming 
and the support of Less Favoured Areas has favoured farmland biodiversity. The 2003 
CAP  reform  promotes  these  and  other  pro–biodiversity  measures.  Measures  under 
market  and  income  policy,  including  mandatory  cross–compliance,  the  single  farm 
payment (decoupling) and modulation, should provide indirect benefits to biodiversity. 

The new Rural Development Regulation17 provides inter alia for enhanced support for 
Natura  2000,  maintains  agri–environmental  measures  and  payments  for  areas  with 
handicaps  and  provides  for  a  set  of  measures  in  support  of  sustainable  forest 
management  (some  tailored  to  enhance  ecological  value)  such  as  forest–environment 
payments.  However,  realisation  of  the  full  benefit  of  these  measures  will  depend  on 
implementation by Member States and on the available budget. 

4.2.4. 

Integration into fisheries policy 

EU  fisheries  and  aquaculture  have  had  damaging  impacts  both  on  commercially 
harvested fish stocks, and on non–target species and habitats. While recent years have 
seen  progress  in  integrating  biodiversity  into  fisheries  policy,  it  is  too  soon  to  judge 
effectiveness.  However,  the  reformed  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (CFP)18,  when  fully 
implemented,  will  reduce  fishing  pressure,  improve  the  status  of  harvested  stocks  and 
better protect non–target species and habitats. 

4.2.5. 

Integration into regional and territorial development policy 

The  nature  directives  and  the  Environmental  Impact  Assessment  (EIA)  Directive19 
require  the  consideration  of  potential  impacts  of  certain  regional  and  territorial 
developments. This includes consideration of alternatives and the design of measures to 
prevent  and  reduce  negative  impacts.  Careful  assessments  carried  out  early  in  the 
decision–making process have proven helpful. However, it is often done too late or is of 
poor  quality.  The  recent  introduction  of  strategic  environmental  assessments  (SEA)20, 
which apply to certain plans and programmes, should help better reconcile conservation 
and  development  needs  by  ensuring  consideration  of  impacts  much  earlier  in  the 
planning process. 

4.2.6.  Control of Alien Species 

Invasive  alien  species  were  identified  in  the  6th  EAP  as  a  priority  for  action.  While 
support has been given to some localised eradication programmes via LIFE funding, the 
Community  has  still  to  develop  a  comprehensive  strategy  to  address  this  issue.  Work 
has now begun on this. 

17 
18 
19 
20 

Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, OJ L 277, 21.10.2005, p.1 
COM (2001) 135 final 
Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC, OJ L 073, 14.3.1997, p.5  
Directive 2001/42/EC, OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p.30 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4.3. 

Biodiversity in EU external policy 

4.3.1. 

International governance 

The EU plays an active role in international biodiversity governance. The Commission 
and  Member  States  believe  however  that  implementation  of  the  CBD  needs  to  be 
substantially reinforced. The EU also actively implements a range of other biodiversity–
related international agreements and promotes synergies between these. 

4.3.2.  External assistance 

Member States are important donors to the Global Environment Facility which supports 
biodiversity projects. However, these funds amount to less than 1/100th of Community 
and Member States’ total annual development aid budgets. Progress in mainstreaming 
biodiversity  in  these  budgets  has  been  disappointing,  largely  due  to  the  low  priority 
often given to biodiversity in the face of other compelling needs. 

However,  the  Commission’s  Communication  on  Policy  Coherence  for  Development21 
specifies: “The EU should enhance funding  earmarked  for  biodiversity  and  strengthen 
measures  to  mainstream  biodiversity  in  development  assistance.”  This  ambition  is 
carried  forward  in  the  new  EU  Development  Policy22  (the  European  Consensus  on 
Development Cooperation) and Neighbourhood Policy23. 

4.3.3. 

International trade 

A start has been made on efforts to address the impact of the timber trade on tropical 
forests24,  but  little  has  been  done  to  tackle  other  trade–related  causes  of  deforestation. 
Some  progress  has  been  achieved  on  wildlife  trade  through  active  engagement  in  the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. More generally, the EU has 
promoted  the  integration  of  the  environmental  dimension  into  international  trade  (for 
instance  through  its  work  on  trade–related  sustainability  impact  assessments)  and  in 
global  efforts  to  curb  unsustainable  production  and  consumption  patterns  —  but  with 
few concrete results for biodiversity to date. 

4.4. 

Supporting measures 

4.4.1.  Knowledge 

The 6th Framework Programme25, complemented by Member States’ research funding, 
has helped strengthen a European approach to biodiversity, land use and climate change 
research and improve scientific support to policy for the EU and its partner regions, in 
particular those of the developing world. However, much more is needed to fill critical 
knowledge  gaps.  A  helpful  assessment  of  research  needs  has  been  produced  by  the 
European  Platform  for  Biodiversity  Research  Strategy.  The  recent  proposal  for  the  7th 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

COM (2005) 134 final 
COM (2005) 311 final 
COM (2003) 104 final, COM (2004) 373 final 
COM (2003) 251 final 
Decision No 1513/2002/EC, OJ L 232, 29.8.2002, p.1 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
Framework  Programme  (FP7)26  provides  opportunity  to  address  these  needs  through 
cooperation, new infrastructures and capacity building. 

The MA has played a key role in bringing to political and public attention the current 
state and trends of biodiversity and ecosystem services globally. Important as this has 
been,  there  is  currently  no  mechanism  to  ensure  that  this  is  regularly  reviewed  and 
updated. 

4.4.2.  Awareness raising and public engagement 

The  Community  institutions,  Member  States  and  civil  society  have  pursued  a  wide 
range  of  initiatives  in  this  regard,  including  adoption  of  Directives  on  the  Århus 
Convention,  and  the  multi–stakeholder  Countdown  2010  initiative.  The  2010  targets 
provide a helpful focus to raise the political profile of the issue. 

4.4.3.  Monitoring and reporting  

Progress is being made on the development and streamlining of indicators, monitoring 
and reporting. A biodiversity state indicator was selected both as a structural indicator 
in  2004  and  as  a  headline  sustainable  development  indicator  in  2005.  In  addition,  the 
Commission  is  developing  a  headline  set  of  biodiversity  indicators  with  the  European 
Environment  Agency,  based  on  those  adopted  by  the  CBD.  Work  is  in  progress  to 
develop monitoring approaches and tools, and to streamline reporting under the nature 
directives. 

5. 

WHAT MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE? 

5.1. 

An EU Action Plan to 2010 and Beyond 

The  2003–04  policy  review  culminated  in  an  important  stakeholder  conference  held 
under the Irish Presidency  in  Malahide in May 2004 which achieved broad consensus 
on  priority  objectives  towards  meeting  the  2010  commitments,  expressed  in  the 
‘Message from Malahide.’27 

Building on this, and on the analysis presented in sections 2–4 above, the Commission 
has  identified  four  key  policy  areas  for  action  and,  related  to  these,  ten  priority 
objectives. Additionally, the Commission has identified four key supporting measures. 
These  objectives  and  supporting  measures  are  strongly  supported  by  the  results  of  a 
recent public consultation.28 

Delivery of the objectives and supporting measures will require specific actions which 
are set out, with related targets, in an ‘EU Action Plan to 2010 and Beyond’, annexed to 
this Communication. The Action Plan also specifies actions and targets for monitoring, 
evaluation and reporting. 

26 
27 
28 

COM (2005) 119 final. 
In: Conference Report, DG Environment on Europa 
DG Environment consultation page on Europa 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  Action  Plan  represents  an  important  new  approach  for  EU  biodiversity  policy,  in 
that  it  addresses  both  Community  and  Member  States,  specifies  the  roles  of  each  in 
relation to each action, and provides a comprehensive plan of priority actions towards 
specified, time bound targets. Success will depend on dialogue and partnership between 
the Commission and Member States and common implementation. 

This Action Plan responds to the recent CBD call to prioritise actions to 201029, and is 
intended  as  a  complement  to  the  EC  Biodiversity  Strategy  and  Action  Plans.  Member 
States  are  encouraged  to  adjust  their  own  strategies  and  action  plans  taking  it  into 
account. 

The  Commission  proposes  that,  following  consideration  by  Council  and  Parliament, 
implementation  of  the  Action  Plan  should  be  overseen  by  the  existing  Biodiversity 
Expert  Group  (BEG).  The  BEG  should  also  work  to  ensure  coordination  and 
complementarity between Community and Member States level actions. 

5.2. 

The four key policy areas and ten priority objectives  

This  section  introduces  the  four  key  policy  areas  and  ten  priority  objectives,  explains 
their scope, and highlights some of the key actions identified in the Action Plan. 

5.2.1.  POLICY AREA 1: Biodiversity in the EU 

Objectives 

1. 

To safeguard the EU's most important habitats and species. 

Action for the EU’s most important habitats and species is vital to halting biodiversity 
loss  by  2010  and  fostering  recovery.  Securing  these  habitats  requires  greater 
commitment from Member States to propose, designate, protect and effectively manage 
Natura  2000  sites.  It  also  requires  that  they  strengthen  coherence,  connectivity  and 
resilience  of  the  network,  including  through  support  to  national,  regional  and  local 
protected  areas.  The  use  of  species  action  plans  for  the  recovery  of  the  EU’s  most 
threatened  species  should  be  extended.  Comparable  measures  for  habitats  and  species 
are required in those EU outermost regions not covered by the nature directives30. 

2. 

3. 

To conserve and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services in the wider EU 
countryside. 

To conserve and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services in the wider EU 
marine environment.  

Natura 2000 and the conservation of threatened species will not be viable in the long–
term  without  a  wider  terrestrial,  freshwater  and  marine  environment  favourable  to 
biodiversity.  Key  actions  include:  optimising  the  use  of  available  measures  under  the 
reformed CAP, notably to prevent intensification or abandonment of high–nature–value 
farmland,  woodland  and  forest  and  supporting  their  restoration;  implementing  the 

29 
30 

CBD Secretariat (2006) op. cit. 
i.e.  measures  taken  voluntarily  and  at  national  initiative  for  French  Guiana,  Reunion, 
Guadeloupe, Martinique 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
forthcoming Forest Action Plan including measures to prevent and combat forest fires; 
optimising  the  use  of  available  measures  under  the  reformed  CFP,  notably  to  restore 
fish  stocks,  reduce  impacts  on  non–target  species  and  reduce  damages  to  marine 
habitats; and advancing implementation of key environmental framework directives and 
thematic  strategies  which  reduce  pressures  on  biodiversity,  notably  by  improving  the 
quality of freshwater, of the marine environment and of soils, and by reducing diffuse 
pollutant pressures (e.g. airborne acidifying and eutrophicating substances, nitrates from 
farm sources, pesticides). 

4. 

To  reinforce  compatibility  of  regional  and  territorial  development  with 
biodiversity in the EU. 

Better planning at Member State, regional and local levels holds the key to preventing, 
minimising  and  offsetting  negative  impacts  of  regional  and  territorial  development, 
thereby reinforcing the compatibility with biodiversity. This requires taking account of 
biodiversity  needs  ‘further  upstream’  in  the  decision–making  process.  Key  actions 
include: effective treatment of biodiversity in SEA and EIA; ensuring that community 
funds for regional development benefit, and do not damage, biodiversity; and building 
partnerships between planners, developers and biodiversity interests. 

5. 

To  substantially  reduce  the  impact  on  EU  biodiversity  of  invasive  alien 
species and alien genotypes. 

Various measures for the prevention and control of invasive alien species are in place 
but some policy  gaps  may remain;  a  comprehensive EU strategy should be developed 
for this purpose as well as specific actions including an early warning system. 

5.2.2.  POLICY AREA 2: The EU and global biodiversity 

Objectives 

6. 

7. 

8. 

To  substantially  strengthen  effectiveness  of  international  governance  for 
biodiversity and ecosystem services. 

To substantially strengthen support for biodiversity and ecosystem services in 
EU external assistance. 

To  substantially  reduce  the  impact  of  international  trade  on  global 
biodiversity and ecosystem services. 

New impetus in Community and Member State action is required if the commitment to 
significantly reduce the rate of biodiversity loss globally by 2010 is to be met. A more 
coherent  EU  approach  is  required,  which  ensures  synergy  between  actions  for 
governance,  trade  (including  bilateral  agreements)  and  development  cooperation. 
Regarding  governance,  the  EU  should  focus  on  more  effective  implementation  of  the 
CBD  and  related  agreements.  Regarding  external  assistance,  the  EU  should  enhance 
‘earmarked’  funds  for  biodiversity  and  strengthen  mainstreaming  of  biodiversity  into 
sector  and  geographical  programmes.  Regarding  trade,  measures  to  address  tropical 
deforestation, including trade in commodities which drive deforestation, are particularly 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
urgent.  Rapid  implementation  of  the  programme  of  Forest  Law  Enforcement 
Governance  and  Trade31  can  make  an  important  contribution  in  this  regard.  Effective 
action  in  the  biodiversity–rich  overseas  countries  and  territories  of  Member  States  is 
vital to the EU’s credibility in this international arena. 

5.2.3.  POLICY AREA 3: Biodiversity and climate change 

Objective 

9. 

To support biodiversity adaptation to climate change. 

There  is  broad  scientific  and  political  consensus  that  we  have  entered  a  period  of 
unavoidable and unprecedented climate change. Impacts on biodiversity in the EU are 
already measurable. Climate change has the potential, over a period of a few decades, to 
undermine our efforts for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. 

Substantial cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are required to mitigate the longer–
term  threat  to  biodiversity.  We  must  honour  our  Kyoto  commitments  and  more 
ambitious global emissions targets post–2012 are needed in order to limit the increase in 
global annual mean temperature to no more than 2oC above pre–industrial levels. 

Protection  of  biodiversity  can  help  limit  atmospheric  greenhouse  gas  concentrations 
because forests, peat lands and other habitats store carbon. Policies will also be needed 
to help biodiversity adapt to changing temperature and water regimes. This requires in 
particular securing coherence of the Natura 2000 network. Care must also be taken to 
prevent, minimise and offset any potential damages to biodiversity arising from climate 
change adaptation and mitigation measures. 

5.2.4.  POLICY AREA 4: The knowledge base 

Objective 

10. 

To  substantially  strengthen  the  knowledge  base  for  conservation  and 
sustainable use of biodiversity, in the EU and globally 

Understanding  biodiversity  presents  one  of  the  greatest  scientific  challenges  facing 
mankind.  There  is  a  critical  need  to  strengthen  our  understanding  of  biodiversity  and 
ecosystem  services,  if  we  are  to  refine  our  policy  response  in  future.  This  requires 
strengthening  (under  FP7  and  national  research  programmes)  the  European  Research 
Area, its  international  dimension,  research infrastructures, the science–policy interface 
and data interoperability for biodiversity. This should exploit emerging information and 
communication  technologies.  Subject  to  funding  being  found  from  existing  financial 
resources,  the  Commission  will  establish  an  EU  mechanism  for  independent, 
authoritative  research-based  advice  to  inform  implementation  and  further  policy 
development.  Internationally,  the  EU  should  identify  and  support  ways  and  means  to 
strengthen independent scientific advice to global policy making, inter alia by actively 
contributing to CBD consideration of the 2007 evaluation of the MA, and the ongoing 

31 

COM (2003) 251final 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
consultations  on  the  need  for  improved  International  Mechanisms  on  Scientific 
Expertise on Biodiversity. 

5.3. 

The four key supporting measures 

1. 

Ensuring adequate financing  

Adequate financing, both for Natura 2000 and for biodiversity outside Natura 2000, is 
essential.  The  new  Financial  Perspectives  for  2007–13  open  opportunities  for  co-
financing of biodiversity and Natura 2000 under the Fund for Rural Development32, the 
Cohesion  and  Structural  Funds33,  Life+34  and  FP7.  However,  the  budget  reduction 
foreseen  by  the  December  European  Council35  would  certainly  influence  funding 
options for biodiversity under these instruments. Consequently, national implementation 
choices  will  be  crucial.  The  Community  and  Member  States  will  need  to  ensure, 
through  Community  co-financing  and  Member  States’  own  resources,  adequate 
financing  of  the  Action  Plan,  notably  in  relation  to  Natura  2000,  high–nature–value 
farmland  and  forests,  marine  biodiversity,  global  biodiversity,  biodiversity  research, 
monitoring and inventory. In any case the allocation of Community financial resources 
should take into account the budgetary constraints and be within the limits of the new 
Financial Perspectives. 

2. 

Strengthening EU decision–making  

This  involves:  improving  coordination  and  complementarity  between  Community  and 
Member  States,  notably  through  the  BEG;  ensuring  existing  and  new  policies  and 
budgets  (including 
those  developed  under  Lisbon  Strategy  National  Reform 
Programmes) take due account of biodiversity needs; taking account of environmental 
costs  (including  loss  of  natural  capital  and  ecosystem  services)  in  decision–making; 
improving coherence at national level between various plans and programmes affecting 
biodiversity; and ensuring decision–making at regional and local level is consistent with 
high–level commitments for biodiversity. 

3. 

Building partnerships  

This  involves  building  progressive  partnerships  between  government,  academia, 
conservation  practitioners,  landowners  and  users,  private  sector,  finance  sector, 
educational  sector  and  the  media  to  frame  solutions.  It  involves  building  on  existing 
provisions  (e.g.  under  the  CAP  and  CFP)  and  the  development  of  new  partnerships, 
including outside the EU. 

32 

33 
34 
35 

Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, OJ L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 1 and Decision No 2006/144/EC, OL 
L 55, 25.2.2006, p. 20 
COM (2004) 492, 493, 494 , 495, 496 final  
COM (2004) 621 final 
Presidency Conclusions, European Council Brussels, 15 and 16 December 2005 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4. 

Building public education, awareness and participation  

This involves development and implementation of a communications strategy in support 
of  the  Action  Plan,  working  closely  with  the  Countdown  2010  initiative,  and 
implementation of the Ǻrhus Convention and related Directives36. 

5.4.  Monitoring, evaluation and review 

The  Commission  will  report  annually  to  Council  and  Parliament  on  progress  in 
implementation  of  the  Action  Plan,  starting  with  the  period  from  adoption  of  this 
Communication to end 2007. 

The second report (to end 2008) will include a concise mid–term evaluation of progress 
towards the 2010 targets. 

The fourth annual report (to end 2010) will evaluate the extent to which the EU has met 
its 2010 commitments. This will involve qualitative assessment of the extent to which 
Action  Plan  actions  have  been 
including 
consideration  of  underlying  assumptions  and  possible  missing  actions.  The  evaluation 
will  also  be  informed  by  quantitative  data  relating  to  a  set  of  headline  biodiversity 
indicators  (Annex  2).  A  biodiversity  index  will  be  developed  as  a  sustainable 
development  and  structural  indicator  in  2007.  The  Commission  will  develop  and 
implement  these  indicators  and  related  monitoring  in  partnership  with  Member  States 
and civil society. 

implemented  and 

targets  achieved, 

The  seventh  annual  report  (to  end  2013)  will  provide  a  similar  evaluation,  addressing 
also all post–2010 targets in the Action Plan. 

These  evaluations  will  inform  final  evaluation  of  the  6th  EAP,  review  of  sectoral 
policies  and  budgets  during  the  2007–2013  period,  and  policies  and  budgets  for  the 
post–2013 period. 

5.5. 

A longer–term vision for biodiversity and the EU as a frame for policy 

Finally,  halting  the  loss  of  biodiversity  and  putting  it  on  the  road  to  recovery  are 
important milestones. However, there is a need to look beyond 2010 towards a longer–
term  vision  as  a  framework  for  policy.  This  vision  should  recognise  our 
interdependence with nature and the need for a new balance between development and 
the  conservation  of  the  natural  world.  The  Commission  will  launch  a  debate  in  this 
regard. 

36 

Directives 2003/4/EC, OJ L-41, 14.2.2003 p. 26 and 2003/35/EC, OJ L156, 25.6.2003, p. 17 

EN 

15 

   EN