Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - A mid-term assessment of implementing the ec biodiversity action plan {SEC(2008) 3042} {SEC(2008) 3043} {SEC(2008) 3044} {SEC(2008) 3045}
Date: 2008-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, biodiversity, environmental protection, management of resources, natural resources, project evaluation, sustainable development

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 16.12.2008 
COM(2008) 864 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

A MID-TERM ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTING THE EC BIODIVERSITY 
ACTION PLAN 

{SEC(2008) 3042} 
{SEC(2008) 3043} 
{SEC(2008) 3044} 
{SEC(2008) 3045} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

In  May  2006,  the  Commission  adopted  a  communication  on  "Halting  Biodiversity  Loss  by 
2010  –  and  Beyond:  Sustaining  ecosystem  services  for  human  well-being"1.  The 
Communication  underlined  the  importance  of  biodiversity  protection  as  a  pre-requisite  for 
sustainable development, as well as setting out a detailed Action Plan to achieve this. 

Biodiversity  is  now  higher  on  the  EU  political  agenda  than  ever  before.  The  Spring  2008 
European  Council  restated  its  commitment  to  strengthening  efforts  aimed  at  halting 
biodiversity  loss  by  2010  and  beyond,  and  highlighted  the  essential  role  of  Natura  2000  in 
achieving  this  objective.  However,  has  this  high-level  political  commitment  to  biodiversity 
been matched by effective action to halt its loss? 

This  mid-term  assessment  shows  the  progress  made  since  June  2006  and  outlines  the  most 
important  activities  which  have  been  undertaken  by  the  EC  and  its  Member  States  to 
implement the Biodiversity Action Plan. 

It further reveals that the EU is highly unlikely to meet its 2010 target of halting biodiversity 
decline. Intensive efforts will be required over the next two years, both at the level of the EC 
and by the Member States, if we are even to come close to achieving this objective. 

The  assessment  summarises  the  current  state  of  progress  for  each  of  the  four  main  policy 
areas,  10  objectives  and  four  supporting  measures  set  out  in  the  2006  Biodiversity 
Communication and identifies key priorities for further action. A brief update is provided on 
the status and trends in biodiversity, both within the EU and globally. 

STATUS AND TRENDS IN BIODIVERSITY 

Initial results from the first major 'health check' of species and habitat types protected under 
the Habitats Directive show that 50% of species, and possibly up to 80% of habitat types, of 
European  conservation  interest  have  an  unfavourable  conservation  status.  These  results  are 
not  surprising,  as  the  decline  of  species  and  destruction  of  habitats  has  been  ongoing  in 
Europe  for  many  decades  and  this  trend  cannot  be  reversed  within  a  few  years.  There  are 
positive trends for some of the species and the recovery of some of the large carnivore species 
is an encouraging indicator. 

Over 40% of European bird species have an unfavourable conservation status. Farmland birds 
declined rapidly in previous decades and are now starting to stabilize, but recovery will take a 
lot longer. In August 2007 the respected journal, Science, published an analysis showing that 
the  Birds  Directive  has  made  a  significant  difference  in  halting  the  decline  of  many  of 
Europe's  most  threatened  birds2.  The  Directive  has  clearly  helped  these  species,  especially 
through the designation of Special Protection Areas (SPAs). 

1 
2 

COM(2006) 216. 
Science: Vol. 317, no. 5839, pp. 810 – 813. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  latest  assessment  from  the  European  Environment  Agency  (EEA)  led  project  on 
Streamlining  of  European  biodiversity  indicators  (SEBI  2010)  also  reveals  positive  trends 
such  as  in  water  quality.  However,  the  number  of  invasive  species  in  Europe  continues  to 
increase rapidly, with more and more negative economic and ecological consequences3. 

The  global  situation  is  even  more  alarming  as  pressures  on  biodiversity  have  intensified  - 
even  in  the  short  time  since  publication  of  the  Millennium  Ecosystem  Assessment  in  2005. 
Increasing demand for agricultural land for food and energy crops, and animal grazing, places 
even greater pressure on natural systems. 

A  study  on  "The  economics  of  ecosystems  and  biodiversity"  (TEEB)4  concludes  that,  in  a 
"business as usual" scenario, the current decline in biodiversity and related loss of ecosystem 
services  will  continue  and  even  accelerate.  By  2050  we  will  be  faced  with  an  estimated 
further  loss  of  11%  of  the  natural  areas  that  still  existed  in  2000.  Almost  40%  of  the  land 
currently under low-impact forms of agriculture could be converted to intensive agricultural 
use.  An  estimated  60%  of  coral  reefs  could  be  lost  by  2030  through  fishing,  pollution, 
diseases,  invasive  alien  species  and  coral  bleaching  due  to  climate  change.  This  loss  of 
biodiversity  and  ecosystems  is  a  threat  to  the  functioning  of  the  planet,  our  economy  and 
human society. The annual welfare loss generated by the loss of ecosystem services by 2050 
in a 'business-as–usual' scenario has been estimated at 6% of global GDP. 

•  Targeted  measures  under  EU  nature  legislation  have  proved  capable  of  reversing  the 
declining trends of threatened species and habitats, but much greater efforts are needed to 
replicate these successes on a larger scale. 

•  At  a  global  level,  biodiversity  loss  has  not  been  significantly  reduced,  and  major 
ecosystems  -  such  as  forests,  wetlands  and  coral  reefs  -  are  placed  under  increasing 
pressure from destruction and degradation. 

SUMMARY OF PROGRESS  

A. 

POLICY AREA 1: BIODIVERSITY IN THE EU 

Objectives 

1. 

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

At the core of EU biodiversity policy are the Birds and Habitats Directives, which provide the 
legal basis for the Natura 2000 network of protected areas. Since 2006, Member States have 
proposed an area larger than Portugal for protection under the Habitats Directive, extending 
the network for the first time to the new Member States. Likewise, under the Birds Directive, 
Member States have designated an area larger in size than Ireland. The combined Natura 2000 
network now comprises more than 25 000 sites, covering around 17% of the total land area of 
the European Union. 

3 
4 

www.europe-aliens.org 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/pdf/teeb_report.pdf 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
EC  nature  legislation  does  not  apply  to  most  of  the  Overseas  Countries  and  Territories 
(OCTs)  and  Outermost  Regions  (ORs)  of  the  EU  Member  States,  which  host  some  of  the 
richest biodiversity hot-spots on the planet. 

•  Plans  are  on  target  to  complete  the  terrestrial  part  of  Natura  2000  by  2010.  Additional 

efforts are needed, in particular, to finalise the marine network by 2012. 

•  The  challenge  is  increasingly  becoming  one  of  effective  management  and  restoration  of 

sites within the Natura 2000 network. 

•  At a French Presidency meeting in La Réunion in July 2008 representatives of OCTs, ORs 
and  Member  States  undertook  to  develop  voluntary  "Natura  2000-like"  networks  in  the 
OCTs and ORs. 

2. 

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

Under  Axis  2  of  the  Rural  Development  Programme  an  estimated  EUR  20.3  billion  of 
EAFRD  has  been  allocated  to  agri-environment  measures  for  2007-2013,  providing  for 
substantial  support  for  Natura  2000  and  biodiversity.  In  addition,  approximately  EUR 577 
million of EAFRD resources have been dedicated specifically to Natura 2000 agriculture and 
forest  areas,  representing  new  targeted  measures  under  this  policy.  There  are  significant 
differences between Member States in their overall use of these funds. 

Under  cross-compliance,  there  are  four  main  standards  of  Good  Agricultural  and 
Environmental  Conditions  (GAEC),  as  well  as  the  Statutory  Management  Requirements 
related  to  the  nature  Directives,  which  can  provide  significant  biodiversity  benefits.  Most 
countries are already applying these measures. As part of the health check of the 2003 CAP 
reform5, the Commission has proposed to strengthen the standard on landscape features under 
GAEC  aimed  at  the  promotion  of  biodiversity.  This  will  contribute  to  retaining  the 
environmental  benefits  of  set-aside  which  the  Commission  proposes  to  abolish.  It  is  also 
proposed to make available additional rural development funding for inter alia biodiversity, 
via  an  increased  transfer  of  money  from  the  first  to  the  second  pillar  of  the  CAP  (i.e. 
modulation). 

A  key  development  in  relation  to  forestry  was  the  adoption  of  the  EU  forest  action  plan  in 
June  2006,  for  which  a  work  programme  was  adopted  with  the  Member  States  in  February 
2008.  Work  is  ongoing  in  various  Member  States  on  the  development  of  river  basin 
management plans under the Water Framework Directive. There is now a related Directive on 
the assessment and management of flood risks6. 

•  A  Common  Monitoring  and  Evaluation  Framework  (CMEF)  for  rural  development  will 
include  biodiversity-relevant  indicators.  This  will  ascertain  the  extent  to  which  measures 
under the rural development policy are delivering biodiversity benefits. 

5 
6 

COM(2008) 306. 
OJ L 288, 6.11.2007, p. 27. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  The  projected  expansion  of  crops  dedicated  to  the  production  of  biomass  and  biofuels, 
although replacing fossil fuels and thus reducing global greenhouse gas emissions may, in 
the  absence  of  adequate  environmental  safeguards,  have  a  negative  impact  on  EU 
biodiversity.  To  avoid  this  potential  negative  impact,  the  Commission  has  proposed 
sustainability criteria for biofuels in the proposed Directive on the Promotion of the use of 
energy from renewable sources. 

•  The failure to adopt the proposed Soil Framework Directive still leaves a major legislative 

gap in relation to the preservation of soil structure and functions. 

3. 

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

The  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive,  adopted  in  June  20087,  provides  the  basis  for 
achieving  good  environmental  status  in  the  marine  environment  and  improved  conservation 
status  for  the  EU's  marine  biodiversity.  A  Communication  on  'The  role  of  the  CFP  in 
implementing an ecosystem approach to marine management' was adopted in April 20088. 

A Council Regulation to combat illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing was adopted on 
29  September  2008.  The  Commission  has  also  put  forward  proposals  to  reduce  unwanted 
catches  and  eliminate  discards  in  European  fisheries9.  A  series  of  fisheries  regulatory 
measures are also being put in place to minimise the impact of fisheries on non-target species 
and habitats. 

•  Many commercial fish stocks in European waters are still outside safe biological limits - a 
situation  which  requires  a  significant  reduction  in  overall  fishing  pressure  to  sustainable 
levels within the framework of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). 

•  A new Data Collection Regulation will support periodic assessments of the progress of the 

CFP in integrating biodiversity protection requirements10. 

4. 

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

Under  the  operational  programmes  for  2007-2013  co-financed  by  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund  (ERDF)  and  the  Cohesion  Fund,  Member  States  have  allocated 
EUR 2 719  million  to  the  “Promotion  of  biodiversity  and  nature  protection”.  A  further 
EUR 1 146  million  has  been  allocated  to  the  "protection  of  natural  assets",  which  includes 
biodiversity  projects.  A  total  of  EUR 1 376  million,  earmarked  for  the  "protection  and 
development  of  natural  heritage"  in  the  framework  of  tourism,  will  also  include  some 
spending on biodiversity. 

7 
8 
9 
10 

OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 
COM(2008) 187. 
COM(2007) 136. 
OJ L 60, 5.3.2008, p. 1–12. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
All  but  three  Member  States  have  allocated  some  funding  for  biodiversity,  although  as  a 
proportion of the overall allocations this varies between countries. Two Member States intend 
to use more than 3% of their allocated funds for biodiversity-related categories. 

•  Though  there  has  been  no  agreement  at  Community  level  on  specific  biodiversity 
indicators  as  part  of  the  core  Structural  Funds  indicators  for  2007-2013,  some  Member 
States  have  developed  such  indicators  and  this  experience  should  be  extended  to  other 
countries. 

•  There is also a need to build on existing good practice cases demonstrating that Cohesion 

policy is having beneficial impacts for biodiversity. 

•  As a significant share of the Structural Funds are now available to new Member States, this 
inevitably leads to greater pressures on biodiversity and requires careful planning to ensure 
that infrastructure needs are compatible with biodiversity protection. 

5. 

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

Fourteen  Member  States  currently  do  not  have  strategies  or  plans  in  relation  to  invasive 
species.  However,  several  of  them  have  included  objectives  addressing  IS  in  their  national 
biodiversity  strategy.  A  Council  Regulation  dealing  specifically  with  invasive  species  in 
aquaculture was agreed on 11 June 200711. 

•  As this remains a significant policy gap, a new Communication "Towards an EU Strategy 

on Invasive Species" presents policy options to tackle IS in the European Union. 

B. 

POLICY AREA 2: THE EU AND GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY 

Objectives 

6. 

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

The  Ninth  Conference  of  the  Parties  to  the  Convention  on  Biological  Diversity  (COP9) 
strengthened  the  implementation  of  important  CBD  Programmes  of  work  on  topics  such  as 
forest biodiversity and protected areas. It established for the first time at global level that the 
production  and  use  of  biofuels  should  be  sustainable  in  relation  to  biodiversity.  It  adopted 
scientific criteria for the identification of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the high seas. It 
also agreed on a process to feed biodiversity concerns into the ongoing climate negotiations 
under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 

The  2010  target  has  been  included  in  the  Millennium  Development  Goals.  In  2007,  G8 
Environment Ministers launched the so-called Potsdam Initiative, containing specific actions 

11 

Council Regulation 708/2007. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
to  achieve  the  2010  biodiversity  target,  and  adopted  the  'Kobe  Call  for  Action  for 
Biodiversity'. 

The EU continues to promote international action in the UN, Regional Fisheries Management 
Organisations  (RFMOs)  and  relevant  international  conventions  to  protect  vulnerable  marine 
habitats. It actively participated in the UNCLOS process that led to the adoption in December 
2006  of  a  Resolution  by  UNGA  on  Sustainable  Fisheries  for  the  protection  of  vulnerable 
deep-sea ecosystems in the high seas. 

•  The unprecedented efforts that  were  called  for  in  the Millennium Ecosystem  Assessment 
have  not  yet  been  forthcoming.  A  major  strengthening  of  global  action  is  still  needed  to 
significantly reduce current rates of biodiversity loss globally by 2010. 

•  Full  advantage  must  be  taken  of  2010  as  the  UN  International  Year  on  Biodiversity  to 

promote awareness of and global action for biodiversity. 

7. 

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

Average annual EU external assistance for biodiversity amounted to about EUR 740 million 
in 2003-2006, representing 48% of the aid related to global biodiversity. Member States also 
donate significant sums to the Global Environment Facility. These funds amount to less than 
1/50th of Community and Member States’ total annual development aid budgets. There is no 
evidence that biodiversity-related funding has increased since the adoption of the Biodiversity 
Action Plan. 

Mainstreaming  biodiversity  in  the  development  cooperation  budgets  of  both  donor  and 
recipient  countries  faces  great  challenges.  This  is  partly  due  to  the  tendency  to  limit  the 
number  of  intervention  sectors12,  often  resulting  in  a  lower  priority  given  to  environmental 
issues amongst other compelling needs. Other factors include the difficulty to earmark funds. 

EC Country Strategy Papers take due account of environmental concerns in addressing focal 
areas  of  cooperation.  This  may  take  the  form  of  undertaking  Strategic  Environmental 
Assessments  (SEA)  and  Environmental  Impact  Assessments  (EIA)  in  connection  with 
environmentally sensitive sector programmes and projects. 

•  Better information on the economics of biodiversity and on its linkages with poverty issues 

would help decision makers on both sides to direct more attention to the issue. 

•  There is a need for further progress in ensuring that environmental assessments (SEA/EIA) 
are systematically carried out in relation to environmentally sensitive aid operations funded 
by Member States and the EC, to prevent and minimize negative impacts on biodiversity 
and enhance environmental benefits wherever possible. 

12 

Not applicable to ' European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument' countries. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
8. 

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

The EU supported the adoption of some important decisions, including on ivory trade and the 
CITES  Strategic  Plan  at  the  14th  Conference  of  the  Parties  of  the  Convention  on  Trade  in 
Endangered Species. 

The  Commission  continues  to  address  the  potential  impact  of  trade  on  biodiversity  through 
Sustainability Impact Assessments (SIAs) of major trade negotiations. The Commission is in 
the  process  of  conducting  SIAs  for  all  its  planned  regional  and  bilateral  free  trade  and 
partnership agreements. 

The  EU  has  contributed  to  progress  in  ongoing  negotiations  for  an  international  regime  on 
access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use 
(ABS) at CBD COP9-MOP4. 

Progress has been made in implementing the EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and 
Trade  (FLEGT)  Action  Plan.  The  first  Voluntary  Partnership  Agreement  (VPA)  was  signed 
with  Ghana  on  3  September  2008.  Negotiations  on  FLEGT  are  ongoing  with  Malaysia, 
Indonesia,  Cameroon  and  Congo  Brazzaville,  and  are  expected  to  start  soon  with  other 
developing  countries.  The  Commission  has  also  proposed  a  Regulation  laying  down  the 
obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the Market.13 

•  A key challenge will be to ensure that the recommendations made in Sustainability Impact 
Assessments (SIAs) are acted upon and to enhance our understanding of the impact of EU 
consumption  of  food  and  non-food  commodities  (e.g.  meat,  soy  beans,  palm  oil,  metal 
ores) that are likely to contribute to biodiversity loss. This could lead to considering policy 
options to reduce this impact. 

C. 

POLICY AREA 3: BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE 

Objective 

9. 

To support biodiversity adaptation to climate change. 

Following its 2007 Green Paper14, the Commission is producing a White Paper on adapting to 
climate change. This will address, inter alia, the relationship between biodiversity and climate 
change. 

A Commission Communication on deforestation15 proposes that, within the framework of the 
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations on the future climate regime, the 
EU calls for halting global forest cover loss by 2030 at the latest and reducing gross tropical 
deforestation by at least 50% by 2020 from current levels. This objective would provide major 
climate change and biodiversity benefits by 2020. 

13 
14 
15 

COM(2008) 644/3. 
COM(2007) 354. 
COM(2008) 645. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  There  is  a  need  for  better  recognition  of  the  critical  role  of  healthy  ecosystems  in 
strengthening resilience to environmental stresses, which will - in turn - reduce exposure to 
the threat posed by climate change. 

•  Synergies  between  climate  change  mitigation  and  adaptation  measures,  and  the 

conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity need to be maximised. 

D. 

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. 

Research  undertaken  under  the  Community's  6th  Research  Framework  Programme  (2002-
2006) is already feeding into the development of EU biodiversity policy. The expectation of 
funding eight biodiversity projects for the first two calls for proposals under FP7 equates to a 
total  EC  contribution  of  EUR 23  million,  about  7%  of  total  expenditure  for  environmental 
projects. At least 14 Member States have a dedicated national or sub-national programme that 
supports biodiversity research. 

As  part  of  the  Potsdam  initiative  agreed  by  G8  in  2007,  a  study  on  "The  economics  of 
ecosystems and biodiversity" (TEEB) has been jointly initiated by the European Commission 
and Germany in collaboration with the European Environment Agency. The results of a first- 
phase assessment were presented to the CBD COP9. 

•  There is a need to ensure that Member States' and Community research funding adequately 

support biodiversity policy. 

•  A second phase of the TEEB study will provide policy conclusions in 2009. 

•  The EC is also engaged in the global strategy for follow-up to the Millennium Ecosystem 
Assessment (MEA) and is committed to developing a regional assessment for Europe. Six 
Member States have plans to follow up on the MEA. 

•  At CBD COP9, the EU and its Member States supported UNEP's proposal for establishing 
an  Intergovernmental  Science-Policy  Platform  on  Biodiversity  and  Ecosystems  Services 
(IPBES), to strengthen independent scientific advice to global policy making. 

E. 

1. 

THE FOUR KEY SUPPORTING MEASURES 

Ensuring adequate financing. 

Opportunities to  co-fund Natura  2000  costs exist in each appropriate EC funding regulation 
for  2007-2013.  Guidelines  and  training  under  an  EC contract  have  been  provided  to  assist 
Member States in applying these funds. An Information Technology Tool on financing Natura 
2000 has been developed. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
For many countries, Axis 2 of the Rural Development Policy appears to be the most important 
Community  funding  source  for  Natura  2000  and  biodiversity.  For  other  countries,  the 
European  Regional  Development  Fund  is  a  significant  source  of  Community  funding. 
However, a systematic problem encountered in many policy areas is the difficulty in obtaining 
reliable figures for the amount of money actually spent on biodiversity. In many cases, this is 
simply due to the inadequacy of the recording and reporting procedures. 

•  There is a need to further develop approaches to determine how much Community funding 
has been used by the Member States for nature, and whether this is sufficient to support the 
management and restoration of Natura 2000 and wider biodiversity needs. 

•  Site management plans need to be further developed. The lack of such tools is a potentially 
serious  limitation  to  ensuring  adequate  financing  of  the  Natura  2000  network.  A  new 
Commission study aims to further support linkages between the financing and management 
of Natura 2000. 

2. 

Strengthening EU decision–making and Implementation. 

The governance structure for nature and biodiversity issues within the EU has been reviewed. 
Regular  meetings  of  the  Nature  Directors  from  the  EU  Member  States  now  systematically 
include  items  on  progress  on  the  Biodiversity  Action  Plan  and  the  implementation  of  the 
Nature  Directives.  A  new  Coordination  Group  for  Biodiversity  and  Nature  oversees  a  joint 
technical  work  programme  for  nature  and  biodiversity  issues  within  the  EU.  The 
Commission's  internal  Biodiversity  Inter-service  Group  is  closely  connected  to  this 
Coordination Group. 

A new EU network of practitioners called 'GreenForce', dealing with nature conservation and 
forestry policies and laws in the Member States, has been set up to facilitate communication 
and the sharing of experience on practical implementation, compliance and enforcement. 

An important development was the granting for the first time, in 2007, of interim measures by 
the  EU  Court  of  Justice  to  block  potentially  damaging  activities  in  a  Natura  2000  site  in 
Poland. The Commission used the instrument of an interim measure in its application to the 
Court  in  order  to  avoid  irreversible  imminent  damage  to  protected  sites.  The  request  for  an 
interim  measure  was  withdrawn  when  Poland  agreed  to  halt  the  relevant  works  pending  a 
Court of Justice judgment of the case16. 

•  There is a need to further strengthen the mechanisms for co-operation within and between 
the Community and Member States in delivering the Action Plan, especially with regard to 
policy sectors affecting biodiversity. 

3. 

Building partnerships. 

In  November  2007,  the  Portuguese  Presidency  organised  a  conference  on  Business  and 
Biodiversity  in  Lisbon,  at  which  an  EU  Business  and  Biodiversity  Initiative  was  launched. 

16 

Case C-193/07. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Twenty Member States have indicated that they have national initiatives aimed at promoting 
partnerships for biodiversity. 

•  The  Commission  is  establishing  an  EU  Business  and  Biodiversity  technical  support 

platform. 

•  A 'Natura 2000 Partner Reward Scheme' is being established to promote the management 

of, and communication of Natura 2000. 

4. 

Building public education, awareness and participation. 

A Flash Eurobarometer opinion poll in December 2007 revealed that only a minority of EU 
citizens  considered  that  they  were  well  informed  on  the  subject  of  biodiversity  loss. 
Recommendations from a scoping study for an EU-wide Communication Campaign have fed 
into  the  2008  call  for  proposals  of  the  Information  &  Communication  component  of  the 
LIFE+.  Some  Member  States  have  already  initiated  campaigns  to  raise  awareness  about 
biodiversity. 

•  To  harness  public  support  for  EU  action  to  halt  biodiversity  loss,  the  Commission  is 
considering  priority  actions  for  a  public  communication  campaign  to  be  launched  in 
support of national and other campaigns. 

•  Biodiversity  also  needs  to  be  better  integrated  into  communication  campaigns  promoting 

sustainable lifestyles and sustainable consumption and production. 

F. 

MONITORING 

There has been continuing progress with the SEBI 2010 initiative. A set of 26 pan-European 
biodiversity  indicators  provides  the  basis  for  a  first  European  indicator-based  assessment  of 
progress towards the 2010 biodiversity target, to be published by the EEA in the first half of 
2009.  The  development  of  national  indicators,  aligned  with  the  SEBI  2010  framework,  is 
underway in the Member States. 

•  SEBI 2010 needs to be complemented by other sets of indicators, especially those designed 

to assess progress in policy sectors. 

•  Funding for biodiversity monitoring lags substantially behind national investments in other 
environmental  issues  and  needs  to  be  increased  significantly  to  allow  for  comprehensive 
future assessments. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
CONCLUSIONS 

Despite the fact that the 2006 Biodiversity Communication was well received and that there is 
some progress in delivery  of  the  EC  Biodiversity Action  Plan, it is highly unlikely -  on  the 
basis of current efforts - that the overall goal of halting biodiversity loss in the EU by 2010 
will  be  achieved.  This  will  require  significant  additional  commitment  by  the  European 
Community and the EU Member States over the next two years, if we are even to come close 
to our objective. 

At the global level, biodiversity loss is disastrous, with ecosystems frequently being degraded 
to  the  point  where  natural  processes  are  disrupted,  resulting  in  severe  economic  and  social 
impacts. New issues, such as expansion of the agricultural sector to meet increasing demand 
for food, and the emergence of alternative market outlets such as biofuels, have emerged as 
major challenges. 

The EU biodiversity policy framework will need to be further strengthened, as there are still 
important gaps, such as addressing invasive species. There is also a need to put in place an 
effective legal framework for the conservation of soil structure and functions. 

Integration of biodiversity considerations into other sectoral policies remains a key challenge. 
There is also a need to develop valuation systems for ecosystem services, relevant to different 
policy sectors. 

The  Commission  will  continue  to  closely  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  Biodiversity 
Action  Plan  with  a  view  to  providing  a  comprehensive  assessment  at  both  Community  and 
Member State levels in 2010. 

EN 

12 

   EN