COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Technical information on Green Infrastructure (GI) Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital
Date: 2013-05-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU investment, climate change, conservation of resources, economic infrastructure, marine ecosystem, protected area, sustainable agriculture, terrestrial ecosystem

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 6.5.2013  
SWD(2013) 155 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Technical information on Green Infrastructure (GI) 

Accompanying the document 

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

Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital 

{COM(2013) 249 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Technical information on Green Infrastructure (GI) 

Accompanying the document 

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

Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

PART I: COMPONENTS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 

PART II: BENEFITS AND FUNCTIONS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 

PART III: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND EUROPEAN POLICIES 

PART IV: GLOSSARY 

PART V: EXAMPLES OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IN ALL EU MEMBER STATES 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
PART I: COMPONENTS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 

1. 
Part 1: Components of GI1 

Physical  Building  Blocks:  the  network  of  green  spaces  in  which  and  through  which 
natural functions and processes are sustained. 

The types of physical features that contribute to GI are diverse, specific to each location or 
place  and  very  scale-dependent.  On  the  local  scale,  biodiversity-rich  parks,  gardens,  green 
roofs,  ponds,  streams,  woods,  hedgerows,  meadows,  restored  brownfield  sites  and  coastal 
sand-dunes can all contribute to GI if they deliver multiple ecosystem services. Connecting 
elements are green bridges and fish ladders. On the regional or national scale, large protected 
natural  areas,  large  lakes,  river  basins,  high-nature  value  forests,  extensive  pasture,  low-
intensity  agricultural  areas,  extensive  dune  systems  and  coastal  lagoons  are  just  a  few  of 
many examples. On the EU scale, trans-boundary features such as international river basins, 
forests  and  mountain  ranges  are  examples  of  the  EU’s  supranational  GI.  They  have  an 
important  function:  to  deliver  multiple  benefits,  or  connect  ecosystems  so  that  they  can 
deliver their services. 

Projects: interventions designed to conserve, improve or restore nature, natural functions 
and processes to secure multiple ecosystem services for human society. 

There  are  now  hundreds  of  examples  of  GI  projects  in  Europe,  many  of  which  are  not 
necessarily  labelled  as  GI.  Key  initiatives  include  the  French  ‘trame  verte  et  bleue’,  the 
German ‘Wiedervernetzungsprogramm’, the UK ‘room for nature’ initiative, the Dutch ‘room 
for  the  river’  initiative,  the  Estonian  and  Dutch  ecological  networks  or  the  South-East 
European  Lower  Danube  Green  Corridor  (see  Part  V  for  more  examples  of  GI  projects  in 
Member States) 

Planning:  Integrating  the  conservation,  improvement  and  restoration  of  nature,  natural 
functions and processes into spatial planning and territorial development and sustainably 
delivering the associated benefits for human society. 

Neither  GI  nor  any  other  approach  can  simultaneously  maximise  all  benefits and trade-offs 
will  have  to  be  carefully  assessed.  However,  integrating  GI  considerations  into  planning 
processes allows all the relevant issues to be assessed and a coherent decision to be taken in 
order  to  reap  as  many  benefits  as  possible.  This  "mainstreaming"  of  GI  into  planning  is 
particularly important in the case of overarching multi-annual strategies and plans.  

Tools:  Methodologies  and  techniques  that  help  us  understand  the  value  of  the  benefits 
nature  provides  to  human  society  and  mobilise  the  investments  necessary  to  sustain  and 
enhance those benefits. 

1 

More detailed information on http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/index_en.htm. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

PART II: BENEFITS AND FUNCTIONS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 

Table 1: Overview of key Green Infrastructure benefits 

Benefits group 

Specific Green Infrastructure benefits 

Enhanced  efficiency  of  natural 
resources 

Maintenance of soil fertility 

Biological control 

Pollination 

Storage of freshwater resources 

Climate  change  mitigation  and 
adaptation 

Carbon storage and sequestration 

Temperature control 

Storm damage control 

Erosion control 

Disaster prevention 

Reduction of the risk of forest fires 

Water management 

Flood hazard reduction 

Regulation of water flows 

Water purification 

Water provisioning 

Land and soil management 

Reduction of soil erosion 

Maintaining/enhancing soil’s organic matter 

Increasing soil fertility and productivity 

Mitigating land take, fragmentation and soil sealing 

Improving 
attractive 

land  quality  and  making 

land  more 

Higher property values 

Existence  value  of  habitat,  species  and  genetic 
diversity 

Bequest  and  altruist  value  of  habitat,  species  and 
genetic diversity for future generations 

Multifunctional resilient agriculture and forestry 

Conservation benefits 

Agriculture and forestry 

Enhancing pollination 

Enhancing pest control 

Low-carbon 
energy 

transport 

and 

Better integrated, less fragmented transport solutions 

Innovative energy solutions 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
Investment and employment 

More investment 

Better image 

More employment 

Labour productivity 

Health and well-being 

Air quality and noise regulation 

Accessibility for exercise and amenity 

Better health and social conditions 

Tourism and recreation 

Destinations made more attractive 

Education 

Resilience  

Range and capacity of recreational opportunities 

Teaching resource and ‘natural laboratory’ 

Resilience of ecosystem services 

Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#implementation, adapted. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
  
  
Table 2: Examples of costs and benefits from a selection of GI projects in Europe 

Project 

Location 

Costs and Benefits 

Urban nature for 
Lindenholt 
neighbourhood of 
Nijmegen 

Netherlands  Comparing reference scenario with grey scenario (paved area) and Green Infrastructure 
scenario  (whole  area  planted  with  trees).  Capital  and  maintenance  costs  of  different 
options. Estimation of the health impacts of particulate matter and NOx, noise impacts, 
flooding  impacts,  water  treatment  costs,  enjoyment  of  the  environment,  recreation, 
climate  regulation,  reduced energy  costs  due  to  wind  shelter  effects,  impacts  on  travel 
time,  carbon  sequestration.  Net  present  values:  loss  of  EUR  275 m  for  grey  scenario, 
gain of EUR 230 m for Green Infrastructure scenario. 

Blackwater Estuary 

United 
Kingdom 

River Elbe floodplain 
restoration 

Germany 

Agro-ecosystem of 
Sint-Truiden 

Belgium 

Costs  and  benefits  of  maintaining  flood  defences  with  those  of  sea-level  rise  and  the 
coastal  squeeze  of  intertidal  wetlands.  Benefits  included  fisheries  production,  carbon 
sequestration  and  other  environmental  benefits.  Costs  included  capital  costs  of 
realignment,  maintenance  costs  and  opportunity  costs  of  agricultural  land.  The  study 
shows  that  managed  realignment  can  be  cost-effective  if  non-marketed  benefits  are 
taken  into  account,  in  particular  for  conservation  and  recreation  (net  present  value  of 
£ 106 m over 25 years or £ 192 m over 100 years). 

Restoration  of  nature  through  dike  shifting,  reducing  the  impact  of  agriculture  and 
constructing  fish  ladders.  Benefit-cost  ratios  ranged  from  2.5  to  4.1  depending  on 
scenarios. Recreation, flood protection and carbon benefits, which were not monetised, 
would increase the value of benefits. Costs covered avoidance costs, engineering costs 
and land opportunity costs. 

Actions  to  protect  the  village  from  soil  erosion  and  mud  floods,  including  through 
grassed waterways, grassed buffer strips, retention ponds and conservation tillage in the 
catchment  area.  The  total  costs  of  these  measures  were  low  (EUR  126/ha/20  years) 
compared  to  repairing  the  damage  caused  by  muddy  floods  in  the  study  area  and  the 
costs  of  cleaning  up  (EUR  54/ha/year)  and  all  secondary  benefits,  including  better 
downstream  water  quality;  lower  downstream  dredging costs;  less  psychological stress 
for inhabitants and greater biodiversity. 

Restoration of the 
Skjern River 
floodplain 

Denmark 

Restoration of the Skjern River floodplain in Denmark would cost US$ 44.2 million but 
provide  net  present  benefits  of  US$ 2.3  million  in  avoided  water  pumping  (currently 
used  to  prevent  flooding)  and  US$ 84.6  million  in  resultant  benefits.  These  include 
hunting, fishing, recreational opportunities and biodiversity conservation. 

River Gardon 
downstream 
restoration 

France 

Restoration  of  river  used  for  recreation  (walking,  swimming,  kayaking,  fishing). 
Valuation of use and non-use values. Costs included investments and functioning costs 
linked to urban and industrial pollution, river artificialisation, agricultural pollution, etc. 
The  overall  net  present  value  of  improvements  is  EUR  36 m.  The  cost-benefit  ratio  is 
1.9. 

National Forest 

United 
Kingdom 

Hoge Kempen 
National Park 

Belgium 

Large  regeneration  area  including  some  former  landfill  sites,  quarries,  other  post-
industrial brownfield sites, in the context of a long-term project to create woodlands and 
priority  open  habitats  on  33 %  of  the  National  Forest  land  area.  The  study  estimated 
£ 178 m  of  costs  based  on  actual  and  predicted  expenditure  to  achieve  the  objectives, 
compared  to  £ 1 623 m  of  benefits,  largely  from  recreation,  with  lower  contributions 
from  carbon,  biodiversity  and  aesthetic  values  in  particular.  Results  indicate  a  net 
present value of £ 1.44 bn and a cost-benefit ratio of 9.1:1. 

Natural assets contribute to job creation. In the densely populated province of Limburg 
(BE), a  local  NGO  convinced  policy  makers  in 2006  with  an  economic  argument  (job 
creation) to create Belgium’s first national park: Apart from protecting biodiversity, the 
‘Hoge Kempen National Park’ created some 400 jobs and stimulated private investment 
in tourism in this historically de-industrialised region. Tourists appreciate the recovering 
nature  in  former  coal  mines  for  its  particular  landscape  and  biodiversity  values. 
(TEEBcase by Schops 2011). 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Table  2:  Examples  of  costs  and  benefits  from  a  selection  of  GI  projects  in  Europe 
(continued) 

Project 

Location 

Benefits 

Ekostaden 
Augustenborg (urban 
regeneration 
initiative) 

Malmö, 
Sweden 

Rainwater run-off rates decreased by half. The image of the area improved. Biodiversity 
increased by 50 % (green roofs have attracted birds and insects and an open storm water 
system provides a better environment for the local plants and wildlife). The impact on 
the environment decreased by 20 %. Unemployment fell from 30 % to 6 %. The turnover 
of tenancies decreased by 50 %. 

Natural Economy 
North West (NENW) 

United 
Kingdom 

Human  health/well-being,  social,  environmental,  economic  (e.g.  direct  gross  value 
added  (GVA)  from  the  environment  calculated  at  £ 2.6 bn,  supporting  109 000  jobs  in 
environmental and related fields). 

Kennet and Avon 
canal restoration 

United 
Kingdom 

Safeguarded habitats, better waste management, tourism, economic (direct and indirect 
employment  totalling  150  to  210  full-time  employment  (FTE)  jobs  between  1997  and 
2002). Total of 1198 to 1353 FTE jobs created and safeguarded. 

Fishing Wales 

United 
Kingdom 

Habitat  improvements,  population  increase  (e.g.  increase  of  >2 000  adult  salmon  and 
trout  each  year),  return  on  marketing  investment  of  20:1,  forecasts  of  £ 10  million  of 
increased income, employment (minimum 75 additional FTE jobs), tourism (additional 
£ 2.1 million per year). 

Green roof-building 
regulations 

Basel, 
Switzerland 

23 %  of  Basel’s  flat  roof  area  is  now  green  (estimated  in  2007  as  700 000 m2); 
endangered  invertebrate  species  are  protected;  four  giga  watt  hours  savings  per  year 
across  Basel  (first  incentive  programme)  and  3.1/year (second  programme);  profits  for 
local businesses from sales of materials and supplies for the installation of green roofs; 
energy savings for business owners; worldwide recognition of Basel for achievements. 

Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/biodiversity/pdf/GI_DICE_FinalReport.pdf, adapted. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
3. 

PART III: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND EUROPEAN POLICIES 

Table 3: EU-level GI policies and instruments 

Policy area 

EU policies and instruments 
considered for Green 
Infrastructure 

Possible measures  

EU 2020 

EU 2020 Strategy 

Giving policy signal through COM 

Innovation Union flagship initiative 

Detailed follow-up on contribution of 
GI to eco-innovation 

Resource  Efficiency  flagship  initiative 
under EU 2020/Roadmap for a Resource-
Efficient Europe 

Detailed follow-up on contribution of 
GI 
(in 
efficiency 
resource 
particular land and ecosystems) 

to 

Environment Strategy 

Seventh EAP 

integrated 

Incorporating  Green  Infrastructure 
and 
into 
planning  with  emphasis  on  health 
benefits 

strategies 

Agricultural Policy 

CAP Pillar 1 — Greening measures incl. 
cross-compliance  

CAP Pillar 2 — EAFRD funding  

Ecological focus areas, crop rotation, 
maintenance 
restoration  of 
permanent  grassland  and  functional 
agricultural landscapes etc. 

and 

Greening  measures  under  Pillar  2 
(agro-environmental measures) 

CAP  Pillar  2  —  Training,  advice, 
extension  services,  planning  provisions 
— Farm Advisory System 

Integration  of  Green  Infrastructure 
into  education  and  training  and  the 
re-establishment of rural areas 

Forestry Policy 

1998  EU  Forestry  Strategy 
forthcoming new EU Forest Strategy 

and 

Biodiversity and Nature 

EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy 

Birds Directive 

Habitats Directive 

Voluntary  scheme  for  biodiversity  and 
ecosystem 
in  EU 
overseas territories 

services 

(BEST) 

LIFE+ Regulation 

forestry 

Integration  of  Green  Infrastructure 
planning 
into 
and 
(defragmentation, 
management 
restoration of forests) 

Development  and  implementation  of 
all  targets,  in  particular  links  to 
actions 5, 6 and 7 

Application of Article 3 

Application of Article 10 

Financing  GI 
territories 

in  EU  overseas 

Financing  Green 
projects 

Infrastructure 

Water Policy 

Water  Framework  Directive/River  Basin 
Management Plans 

Applying  GI 
management 

in 

river 

basin 

Floods Directive 

Better  environmental  options  for 
flood management 

EU  Drought  Policy  (Communication  on 
Water Scarcity and Droughts) 

Using  GI  solutions  for  building  up 
resilience against droughts 

EU Water Blueprint 

Natural water retention measures 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Soil Policy 

Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection 

Soil-sealing guidelines 

Proposal  for  a  Directive  establishing  a 
framework for protecting soil 

Integrated planning on soil issues 

Climate Change Policy 

EU Strategy on Adaptation 

Guidance on GI for adaptation 

Cohesion 
including 
Cohesion 
Innovative Financing 

Policy, 
Territorial 
and 

2050 Low-Carbon Roadmap 

LULUCF 

Regional Policy (Cohesion Policy) 

Technical  Assistance  for  preparation  of 
Major  Projects  (Jaspers)  and  innovative 
financing (Jessica, Jeremie etc.). 

Macro-regional  strategies:  EU  Strategy 
for the Danube Region / EU Strategy for 
the  Baltic  Sea  Region  and  forthcoming 
macro-regional strategies 

Including  GI  in  the  ERDF,  CF  and 
ESF priorities 

Use  of  innovative  funding  for  large 
GI projects 

Inclusion of GI into the programmes 
and 
implementation  of  macro-
regional  strategies  as  well  as  the 
and 
cross-border, 
interregional 
(e.g. 
Alpine Convention) 

transnational 
programmes. 

Transport and Energy 

TEN-T and TEN-E 

measures 

Include 
fragmentation 
connectivity in TEN guidelines 

and 

to 

limit 
improve 

EU White paper on transport IA 

Energy Policy 

Connecting Europe Facility 

Use  GI  for  low-carbon  transport 
planning 

Urban  GI  as  an  example  of  energy 
efficiency in buildings 

Integrate  GI  into  implementation  of 
TENs 

Impact 
Assessment, 
Damage  Prevention  and 
Remediation 

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 
Directives 

Implement  revisions  of 
Directive  

the  EIA 

Strategic  Environmental  Assessment 
(SEA) Directive 

Guidelines  on  including  biodiversity 
and climate change in EIA and SEA 

Environmental Liability Directive 

Assess GI as part of remediation 

Spatial Planning 

European 
Perspective 

Spatial 

Development 

Promote GI on all territorial levels  

ESPON 2013 Programme 

Promote GI as inter-territorial tool 

EU 2020 Territorial Agenda 

Urban Strategy 

Marine 
Zones Policy 

and  Coastal 

Marine Strategy Framework Directive  

EU Maritime Spatial Planning Strategy 

Use  GI 
planning 

for 

integrated 

spatial 

Promote  urban  and  peri-urban  GI 
solutions 

Applying  GI 
environment 

on 

the  marine 

Use  GI 
planning on the seas 

for 

integrated 

spatial 

2002  Recommendation  on  Integrated 
Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) 

Use  GI 
ecosystem services 

for  delivering  coastal 

Fisheries Policy/the EMFF 

Including  GI  on  seas  into  EMFF 
actions 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
Environment and Health  Environment  and  Health  Action  Plan 

Research 

2004–10 

Policy/Horizon 

Research 
2020, 
framework  programme  for  research  and 
innovation 

External Cooperation 

EU external development cooperation 

Hazard Response 

Disaster risk reduction policy  

Use  GI 
particular in urban areas 

for  health  benefits 

in 

Funding  research  projects  related  to 
Green Infrastructure 

Supporting  Green 
based development solutions 

Infrastructure-

Using  Copernicus  products  with 
Green 
Infrastructure-relevant 
information for non-rush mapping 

Use  GI  for  ecosystem-based  risk 
reduction 

Source: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#implementation, adapted. 

In  addition  to  the  EU-level  actions  mentioned  above,  national,  regional  and  local  roles  and 
responsibilities for better deploying Green Infrastructure should be strengthened. 

National authorities play a crucial role in developing the strategic context of and vision for 
GI, depending on how competences are distributed within Member States. This could be done 
by  giving  regional  and  local  authorities  clear  guidance  and  direction  on  how  to  plan  and 
manage  GI,  using  their  own  national  planning  policy  framework  to  set  out  the  need  for 
regional or local planning authorities to consider GI provision in local development planning 
and policy. National authorities could also help gather and share regional information on GI, 
particularly good practice with regard to designing, mapping, assessing, delivering, deploying 
and integrating it into policy and planning. 

The role of regional or local authorities in successfully deploying Green Infrastructure is also 
crucial.  In  most  European  countries,  these  authorities  are  responsible  for  spatial  planning 
decisions.  Different  branches  of  administration  would  need  to  work  together,  such  as 
environmental,  planning,  agricultural  and  social  departments  and  the  treasury.  Due  to  their 
close links to the local public, stakeholders and developers, local authorities are well placed 
to  enhance  communication,  public  participation  and  the  involvement  of  stakeholders. 
Regional or local authorities should be seen as the lead organisation to undertake detailed GI 
(master)  planning,  including  assessing  GI  assets,  taking  into  account  their  location,  threats, 
constraints, priorities, opportunities and regional  factors (geographic, environmental, social, 
political, economic, etc.). 

The establishment and maintenance of GI will not be possible without the full and engaged 
commitment  of  stakeholders  and  resource  holders,  NGOs  and  interest  groups  within  civil 
society. They need to see the advantages GI can bring to their assets, resources and economic 
activities,  improving  the  quality  of  decision-making,  fostering  a  sense  of  ownership  and 
raising  awareness.  Their  early  involvement  in  planning  decisions  can  avoid  conflicts  and 
delays later on in the process. Support for communication and capacity building will need to 
be secured on all levels. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Table 4: EU GI actions targeting different levels 

and 

Figure 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/index_en.htm. 

the  Recommendations 

adapted 

from 

text 

of 

the  GI  Working  Group 

on 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
 
4. 

PART IV: GLOSSARY 

Biodiversity is the variability among living organisms from all sources, including terrestrial, marine 
and  other  aquatic  ecosystems,  and  the  ecological  complexes  of  which  they  are  part.  It  includes 
diversity  within  species,  between  species  and  between  ecosystems.  Connecting  biodiversity  to 
ecosystem  functioning  involves  locating  ecosystems  in  a  multivariate  space  defined  by  dimensions 
that  describe  different  ways  of  relating  organisms  to  one  another  Examples  of  these  dimensions 
include  taxonomic  (or  species)  diversity,  phylogenetic  (evolutionary)  diversity,  functional  diversity 
(variation  in  the  degree  of  expression  of  multiple  functional  traits),  interaction  diversity 
(characteristics of the (food web) network of linkages defined by biotic interactions) and landscape 
diversity  (the  number,  relative  abundance  and  distribution  of  different  habitat  types  within  a 
landscape). 

Connectivity  comprises  two  components,  structural  and  functional  connectivity.  It  expresses  how 
landscapes  are  configurated,  allowing  species  to  move.  Structural  connectivity,  equal  to  habitat 
continuity, is measured by analysing landscape structure, independent of any attributes of organisms. 
This definition is often used in the context of metapopulation ecology. Functional connectivity is the 
response of the organism to the landscape elements other than its habitats (i.e. the non-habitat matrix). 
This  definition  is  often  used  in  the  context  of  landscape  ecology.  A  high  degree  of  connectivity  is 
generally linked to low fragmentation. 

An ecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animal and microorganism communities and their non-
living environment interacting as a functional unit. For practical purposes it is important to define the 
spatial  dimensions  of  the  ecosystem  in  question.  Ecosystems  are  often  grouped  in  units  that  have 
similar specific biotic and abiotic features. 

Ecosystem-based  approaches  are  strategies  and  measures  that  use  nature’s  multiple  services  (= 
nature-based  solutions)  e.g.  for  climate  change  adaptation  and  mitigation.  They  are  part  of  Green 
Infrastructure, because they use biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adaptation 
strategy to help people adapt to or mitigate the adverse effects of climate change — by conserving 
carbon  stocks  and  reducing  emissions  caused  by  ecosystem  degradation  and  loss,  or  by  enhancing 
carbon  stocks,  thus  increasing  resilience  and  reducing  vulnerability.  Green  Infrastructure  adds 
spatially planned, multi-purpose elements to these approaches2. 

Ecological networks are a representation of the biotic interactions in an ecosystem, in which species 
are connected by pairwise interactions. These interactions can be trophic or symbiotic. They include 
areas  covered  by  a  wide  range  of  conservation  measures,  from  a  single  ecoduct  to  intercontinental 
interconnected  networks  of  protected  and  non-protected  areas.  They  usually  aim  to  maintain  the 
functioning  of  ecosystems  to  facilitate  the  conservation  of  species  and  habitats  and  promote  the 
sustainable use of natural resources to reduce the impacts of human activities on biodiversity and/or 
increase the biodiversity value of managed landscapes. They would have to be coherent and resilient 
to  be  functional  parts  of  green  infrastructure,  which  encompasses  ecological  networks  but  goes 
further  due  to  the  multi-purpose  function  additional  to  biodiversity  conservation  that  ecological 
networks  are  designed  for,  and  to  the  inclusion  of  urban  elements  that  are  not  part  of  ecological 
networks. Each Green Infrastructure element should play a role in the network but that does not mean 
they are all physically connected to each other. 

Ecosystem services are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems, or their direct and indirect 
contributions  to  human  well-being.  These  include  provisioning  services  such  as  food  and  water; 
regulating services such as flood and disease control; cultural services such as spiritual, recreational 
and cultural benefits. Since people do not directly use supporting services such as of nutrient cycling, 
they do not obtain benefits from them and they may not strictly be part of ecosystem services. 

A habitat is the place or type of site where an organism or population naturally occurs. 

Natura  2000  is  the  centrepiece  of  EU  nature  and  biodiversity  policy.  It  is  an  EU-wide  network  of 
nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive, incorporating areas designated 
under  the  1979  Birds  Directive.  The  aim  of  the  network  is  to  ensure  the  long-term  survival  of 
Europe’s most valuable and threatened species and habitats. It is not a system of strict nature reserves 

2 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#assess. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
where all human activities are excluded. Whereas the network will certainly include nature reserves, 
most of the land is likely to continue to be privately owned and the emphasis will be on ensuring that 
future  management  is  ecologically  and  economically  sustainable.  The  network  also  fulfils  a 
Community obligation under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. 

Natural  capital  is  the  extension  of  the  economic  notion  of  capital  (manufactured  means  of 
production) to environmental  goods and services. Natural capital is the stock of natural ecosystems 
that yields a flow of valuable ecosystem goods or services into the future. 

Resilience describes the ability of an ecosystem to return to its original state after being disturbed. 

References: 

Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) http://www.unep.org/maweb/en/index.aspx 

MAES Working Group glossary http://biodiversity.europa.eu/ecosystem-assessments/european-level 

CBD Technical series No 23 http://www.cbd.int/ts/ 

of 

Glossary 
http://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/publications/progress-towards-the-european-2010-biodiversity-
target/. 

Technical 

4/2009 

Report 

EEA 

No 

the 

on 

SEBI 

Ad 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/climatechange/index_en.htm 

Biodiversity 

group 

hoc 

on 

and 

Climate 

Change 

Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/ 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
5. 

PART V: EXAMPLES OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IN ALL EU MEMBER STATES 

Table  5:  Green  infrastructure  examples  in  each  Member  State.  More  than  120  examples  were  assessed  in  the  following  studies: 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#assess, 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#design. 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/studies.htm#implementation.  The  last  study  underlines  that,  out  of  100  GI  initiatives  analysed, 
slightly  more  than  half  (52)  were  national  initiatives,  most  others  were  regional  and  local  initiatives  and  about  10  per  cent  (9)  were  transboundary 
initiatives. While most of the Green Infrastructure initiatives in the Member States were government-led, 15 were driven by other types of organisation, 
principally environmental NGOs, research institutes and businesses. The largest number of initiatives identified corresponded to ecological networks 
(35)  followed,  in  order  of  importance,  by  freshwater  and  wetland  management  (15),  multi-functional  use  of  coastal  zones  (11),  urban  Green 
Infrastructure (10), multi-functional use of forests (6), Green Infrastructure mapping (6), mitigation of grey infrastructure (4), multi-functional use of 
farmland (3) and a few others, many of which included climate change mitigation and adaptation (8). 

MS 

Initiative 

Primary GI 
function 

Primary GI 
Elements 

Background and Objectives 

AT  Vienna  Water 
Charter 

Water 
management 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

Vienna obtains almost all of its drinking water from mountain springs originating in the Lower Austrian-Styrian high alpine zones. In 1965, 
the  entire  Rax-Schneeberg-Schneealpen  massif  was  designated  as  a  water  protection  area  containing  the  first  Vienna  mountain  spring 
pipeline. In 1988 the Pfannbauern spring was added to the network as the second spring. Since this addition, under normal conditions these 
protection areas are able to supply all of Vienna with fresh alpine spring water. During periods of high water demand, the Lobau well-field 
provides additional water.  

The principles above  mean that forest soil is used wisely to collect and filter water. Other functions such as timber production, hunting, 
agriculture  and  tourism  have  been  subordinated  to  this  purpose. The  city  of  Vienna  therefore  supports  natural  forest  management  in  the 
areas concerned to guarantee the conservation of healthy forests that offer a habitat to a variety of plant and animal species. 

The  optimum  soil  condition  is  determined  by  its  capacity  to  absorb,  hold  and  filter  water.  The  most  important  aspects  regarding  forest 
structure are stability and resilience, provided by mixed, unevenly aged and structured forest. This means that no clearings are carried out, 
only small-scale interventions occur, natural regeneration is promoted and native tree species are used. Rare and ecologically valuable tree 
species are also encouraged. 

BE  Sigmaplan 

Flood control 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

Considerable flood damages occurred in the past in the Scheldt Estuary. This led to the Flemish Sigmaplan in the beginning of the 1980s to 
protect the estuary against tidal floods. It is generally believed that flood risks will increase significantly during the 21st century due to sea-
level  rise  and  economic  developments.  This  is  the  main  reason  why  the  Flemish  Government  required  an  update  of  the  Sigmaplan.  It 
wanted  to  reconsider  its  necessity,  taking  several  issues  into  account.  Besides  safety  objectives,  nature  conservation  and  shipping  are 
important functions of the estuary that need to be combined. 

EN 

14 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
The authorities responsible for mobility, waterways, forests and nature conservation are implementing the plan between 2000 and 2030. It 
consists of a combination of natural water retention areas and higher dykes. The Sigmaplan is a collection of projects affecting 200 km of 
water courses, including flood control areas with controlled reduced tide and flood control areas combining agricultural and recreational 
land use, wet valley restoration projects, wetlands and meadow bird areas and intertidal mud flats and marshes.  

Water 
management 

BG  Wetlands 
restoration 
and  pollution 
reduction 
project 

areas, 
areas, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

This project was developed to help show how environmentally-friendly rural development activities can improve livelihoods. It focuses on 
the link between poverty and the quality of the environment. As the official appraisal document (Ministry of Environment and Water 2002) 
states: ‘The region along the Danube coast is one of the poorest areas in Bulgaria, mainly related to the decreased economic productivity of 
the Danube River, which has seen a tenfold drop in fishery catch since the late 1960s, seriously affecting rural incomes and livelihoods. 
One of the underlying causes of the decrease is the destruction of riverine wetlands necessary for fish spawning. Hence, linking wetland 
restoration with the sustainable use of natural resources in the region will help increase the well-being of the local population by enabling 
them to increase their economic opportunities for fishery, agriculture, eco-tourism as well as by allowing downstream communities to enjoy 
cleaner water supplies.’ 

CY  Coastal  Area 

Management 
Programme 

Coastal protection  Core areas, 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

CZ  Territorial 

System 
Ecological 
Stability 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

of 

areas, 
areas, 

zones, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

The  Coastal  Area  Management  Programme  (CAMP)  began  in  Cyprus  in  2002  and  the  project  work  was  carried  out  between  2005  and 
2007,  with  the  focus  on  managing  the  whole  coastal  area.  The  programme  was  jointly  implemented  by  the  Cypriot  Government 
(Environment Service of the Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment) and the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP). It 
brought  together  national  and  local  authorities  in  institutions  in  selected  coastal  areas  to  manage  coastal  and  marine  zones  in  a  more 
systematic,  integrated  way.  This  CAMP  includes  using  tools  such  as  Geographic  Information  Systems  (GIS),  Environmental  Impact 
Assessment  (EIA),  Strategic  Environmental  Assessment  (SEA)  and  Economic  Analysis  (EA)  to  support  the  management  of  natural 
resources,  including  water  and  soil,  and  economic  activities  such  as  tourism,  urban  development,  aquaculture  and  waste  treatment.  The 
main  objective  of  CAMP  Cyprus  is  to  develop  an  integrated  coastal  management  strategy.  The  main  focus  is  on  addressing  gaps  in the 
current policy framework for coastal planning and management, particularly on incorporating environmental concerns in the development 
process.  

The specific objectives of CAMP Cyprus are to: 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

strengthen the integration of policies for conserving and sustainably developing coastal resources; 

increase collaboration among the competent Departments/Ministries in the policy-making and implementation process; 

improve public awareness of the scope and significance of coastal management; 

harmonise national or local development visions and reconcile planning policies with the economic development aspirations of local 
communities. 

The TSES initiative officially started in June 1992, although plans and discussions had been going on since the 1970s. The concept is part 
of  national  environmental  legislation.  It  is  obligatory  as  a  basis  for  land  and  use  or  territorial  planning,  forest  management  plans,  water 
management  documents  and  other  documents  regarding  the  protection  and  restoration  of  the  landscape.  The  system  was  thought  to 
represent a network of ecologically significant segments of landscape, efficiently distributed on the basis of functional and spatial criteria, 
covering  biotic,  hydrological,  soil  and  relief  conditions.  Initially  an  extensive  network  of  50 000  core  areas  and  85 000  corridors  was 
planned, to be centrally mapped. Core areas can also be represented by nationally protected areas and Natura 2000, if they overlap with the 
planned  TSES  system.  The  estimated  number  of  features  implemented  as  of  January  2010  amounted  to  less  than  200,  in  core  areas  and 
corridors. Work is underway to adapt the system to current and future conditions. 

EN 

15 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
DE  Green 

Belt 

Germany 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

areas, 

zones, 

Core 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features, 
connectivity 
features 

artficial 

The main objective of the initiative is to reinforce the ecological stability of the landscape by conserving or restoring ecosystems and their 
mutual interconnection. It specifically aims to: 

⋅  maintain and restore the national natural heritage; 

⋅ 

⋅ 

reinforce ecosystem resilience in degraded landscapes and maintain intact areas; 

deliver favourable impacts in surrounding, degraded parts of the landscape. 

The Green Belt of the former Iron Curtain is an ecological network of 1 393 km through Germany. It comprises an area of 17 656 hectares. 
Eight  European  countries  signed  an  agreement  to  form  a  Green  Belt  across  Europe,  running  from  the  Barents  Sea  to  the  Black  Sea,  of 
which the German Green Belt forms a part. It connects several protected areas and aims to enhance their ecological value by developing 
these links and building a network of stakeholders. It connects national parks, nature parks, biosphere reserves and transboundary protected 
areas (70 % in total) and 30 % of non-protected areas along or across borders. It supports regional development initiatives based on nature 
conservation. It is also called ‘a transregional, broad-scale habitat network of great ecological importance’. The areas, that once formed the 
Iron Curtain and the death strip, are now the backbone of the German biotope network. About 15 % of the area is degraded.  

The objectives are the following: 

- to conserve biodiversity and unique natural assets – first of all by harmonising management methods on both sides of the border; 

- to conserve national nature heritage;  

- to conserve a memorial to recent German history;  

- to create a special sort of open-air museum, a cross-section through almost every possible type of German landscape; 

- to create a line that no longer divides but connects the old and the new Länder of Germany, a living monument to German reunification.  

An interesting part of this initiative was the launch of a public appeal to purchase Green Share Certificates. Any donor who gives over 65 
euros becomes a symbolic shareholder in the Green Belt and receives a certificate to prove it. The revenue from the certificates is being 
used  to  purchase  land  along  the  former  border  between  East  and  West  Germany,  to  fund  public  relations  and  lobbying  activities  and  to 
support implementation projects.  

Climate 
adaptation 

change 

DK  Danish 
strategy 
for 
adapting  to  a 
changing 
climate 

Artificial 
connectivity 
features, 
connectivity 
features 

natural 

In 2008, Denmark produced a national strategy for climate adaptation that also takes biodiversity adaptation measures into account. The 
goal of the strategy is to ensure that in the future, climate change is considered and integrated in planning and development in the most 
appropriate way. It contains a number of guidelines to enable authorities, businesses and citizens to react promptly and autonomously to the 
problems  climate  change  will  create  for  Danish  society.  It  notes  that  a  number  of  activities  are  already  underway  to  ensure  that  nature 
remains healthy and robust under the changed climate conditions, for example activities to prevent the fragmentation of nature and ward off 
and combat invasive species.  

EN 

16 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
EE  Estonian 

Green 
Network 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

areas, 

Core 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
zones, 
green  urban  and 
areas, 
peri-urban 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

The  strategy  also  notes  that  municipalities  will  need  information  and  guidelines  on  green  corridors  for  planning  purposes,  and  that 
authorities and the public will need information on invasive species. It notes that economic analysis will be needed in a number of areas 
including 1) the costs and benefits of promoting nature’s own climate change adaptation through planning and regulating that will result in 
less  fragmentation,  ensure  growth  corridors  and  reduce  the  number  of  existing  stress  factors;  2)  nature  and  environment-neutral  climate 
change adaptation in sectors that are important for nature, for example agriculture, forestry and coastal management; 3) pricing a number of 
goods  and  services  from  nature  that  do  not  have  a  direct  market  value,  for  example  the  dilution  of  air  pollution,  water  treatment,  soil 
preservation,  and  models  for  calculating  the  socio-economic  benefits  and  costs  of  nature  management.  Planned  measures  include 
converting  selected  river  valleys  into  natural  wetlands,  measures  to  reduce  oxygen  depletion  in  marine  waters,  or  measures  to  address 
habitat fragmentation. 

Since the 1970s the country has taken a multi-functional approach to ecological networks. In the early 1990s, the network initiative was 
taken up by experts on planning and in 1995 legislation was passed on ecological networks through the Building and Planning Act. The 
national long-term spatial plan, Estonia 2010, established the basic principles of the Estonian ecological network by identifying corridors 
and  12  core  areas  of  international  importance.  The  first  indicative  map  was  produced  in  1983  and  in  1999,  the  second  phase  of  county 
planning (thematic planning) began. It aims to define environmental conditions for developing land use and settlement. The main tasks of 
this phase included the designing the green network that would guarantee its natural, environmental and socio-economic uses for the area. 
The  concept  of  ecological  networks  in  Estonia  is  principally  embedded  in  the  spatial  planning  system  and  implemented  through  other 
sectors  such  as  nature  conservation,  forestry,  water  management  and  others.  At  county  level,  the  green  network  is  an  essential  part  of 
county planning.  

The vision determines the green network total coverage at around 55 % of the whole Estonian territory, in 12 comparatively compact core 
areas. This area is large enough to fulfil the compensatory function not only on the national, but also on the European, scale. The spatial 
planning  system  is  mainly  organised  around  basic  Estonian  administrative  units  (country  —  national  plan  >  counties  —  county  plans  > 
municipalities — comprehensive plans). The green network is, to various degrees, taken into account at all three levels of planning.  

The main aims are to:  

- complete functionally the network of protected areas, connecting them in a complete system with natural areas; 

- to protect valuable natural habitats and preserve the migration routes of wild animals, and to protect and preserve valuable landscapes; 

- to promote nature conservation outside protected areas. 

Additonal multifunctional aims are to:  

- shape the spatial structure of natural areas in the most reasonable way considering the ecological, environmental protection, economic and 
social aspects;  

- to soften, compensate, and forestall the anthropogenic impact on nature, to contribute to the sustainable development strategy;  

- to offer the possibility of nature-friendly management, lifestyles and recreation by ensuring spatial accessibility to natural areas;  

- to minimise future conflicts of interest involving different sectors (forestry, agriculture, transport, recreation) through spatial planning;  

- to guide settlement and land use;  

- to preserve the environment’s natural self-regulation ability;  

- to support international and transboundary cooperation. 

EN 

17 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
EL  Environment 

and 
Sustainable 
Development 
Operational 
Programme 
2007–13 

ES  Towards 

green 

urban 
infrastructure 
in 
Vitoria-
Gasteiz 

Ecosystem service 
provision 

areas, 

Core 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

The Environment and Sustainable Development Operational Programme manages EU structural and other funding available to Greece over 
the period 2007–13. The plan outlining the design for the programme starts from the position that Greece is lagging behind other European 
economies in the scale of industrialisation and therefore has the potential to combine economic growth with sustainable development. The 
overall  strategic  objective  of  this  policy  initiative  is  to  protect  and  sustainably  manage  the  environment  so  that  it  is  the  springboard  for 
protecting  public  health  and  improving  citizens’  quality  of  life,  and  a  basic  factor  in  boosting  economic  competitiveness  by  sustainably 
managing  environmental  elements,  natural  resources  and  urban  centres  (soil,  water,  atmosphere,  nature),  making  public  administration 
better at designing and implementing environmental policy and improving the response of society and citizens in matters of environmental 
protection.  

Ecosystem service 
provision 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
zones, 
green  urban  and 
peri-urban 
areas, 
natural 
connectivity 
features, 
connectivity 
features 

artficial 

Vitoria-Gasteiz, capital of the Basque Country in northern Spain, won the European Green Capital award in  2012. It is one of Europe’s 
cities with the largest proportion of green areas per inhabitant (app. 45 m2 per person) — the entire population lives within 300 m of an 
open  green  space.  For  over  30  years  now,  the  city  has  invested  in  its  613-hectare  green  belt  that  will  soon  cover  950  hectares,  in  a 
successful mobility shift, an extensive network of parks and city walks and sustainable water-management systems. The semi-natural green 
belt has been work in progress since the early 1990s, with a lot of work and investment in reclaiming degraded areas such as gravel pits and 
drained  wetlands.  It  links  the  city  and  the  countryside  —  two  of  its  suburban,  restored  wetland  areas  have  been  recognised  for  their 
significant natural value with international protection status. They are also efficient water retention and purification areas, parks and visitor 
centres, minimising the flow of river water into the city’s sewage treatment network. This would otherwise have needed to be renewed and 
enlarged. 

Apart  from  its  merely  aesthetic  functions  and  those  relating  to  the  recreational  use  of  the  population,  the  city’s  green  belt  plays  a 
fundamental role in cooling the urban climate in summer and improving comfort, reducing contamination, capturing carbon, increasing the 
infiltration capacity of the soil and consequently improving urban biocapacity. Business park projects will transform degraded spaces into 
new, mixed urban areas and watercourses in the city have been re-opened. New green bridges will be built to connect residencial areas with 
the countryside. All this is possible thanks to the urban government’s and its citizens’ rigorous spatial planning and long-term commitment. 
With the current economic crisis and struggle against high unemployment in Spain, Vitoria-Gasteiz is investing heavily in green education 
and jobs, linked to technology and innovation, or through programmes to improve the natural environment and recover biodiversity. 

FR  Green 

and 

blue 
infrastructure 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

areas, 
areas, 

Core 
restoration 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

The green and blue network is a key national spatial planning tool. Its core objective is to stop the decline of biodiversity by conserving and 
restoring  ecological  continuities  to  ensure  the  provision  of  ecosystem  services.  The  green  and  blue  infrastructure  is  managed  locally 
between  the  state  and  local  authorities  (primarily  the  regions)  and  in  consultation  with  other  local  players,  on  a  contractual  basis,  in  a 
coherent framework set out by the state. The representative of the central government in the region (prefet de region) sets out the final plan 
after  consulting  the  regional  council  (parliament).  The  overall  objective  is  to  ensure  that  the  preservation  of  biodiversity  is  taken  into 
account in planning decisions, particularly in territorial coherence schemes (ScoTs) and local urban planning schemes (PLUs). 

At  national  level,  a  framework  document  titled  ‘National  directions  for  preserving  and  enhancing  ecological  continuities’  (‘Orientations 
nationales  pour  la  préservation  et  la  remise  en  bon  etat  des  continuités  écologiques’)  was  produced  and  updated  by  the  competent 
authorities.  They  also  set  up  a  national  green  and  blue  networks  committee  whose  members  are  representatives  of  local  authorities, 
economic actors,  national parks and environmental NGOs. At  regional level, a framework document titled ‘Regional plan for ecological 
coherence’  (‘Schéma  régional  de  cohérence  écologique’),  taking  into  account  the  national  framework,  was  produced.  The  regional 
framework,  which  includes  an  identification  of  areas  and  mapping  and  other  information  on  planned  measures,  is  sent  to  the  local 
authorities for them to take into consideration. The regional schemes need to be taken into account in local planning tools. 

EN 

18 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
HU  Hungarian 

National 
Agro-
Environmental 
Programme 

Ecosystem service 
provision 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

This programme aims to protect biodiversity within agricultural land, that covers 83 % of Hungary. Launched in 2002, it offers financial 
support to farmers who voluntarily implement agro-environmental farming systems. They are particularly encouraged for environmentally 
sensitive  areas,  defined  as  ‘any  extensively  cultivated  area,  that  serves  to  conserve  nature-friendly  cultivation  methods  and  thereby  to 
protect natural habitats and conserve biodiversity, landscape assets and cultural and historical assets’. Some agro-environmental measures 
are aimed at particular species, such as the great bustard and the corncrake. The programme included 2160 farmers and 121 614 hectares of 
environmentally sensitive areas in 2011.  

IE 

Integrated 
Constructed 
Wetlands 

Ecosystem service 
provision 

Restoration  areas, 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

Specific objectives are: 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

farm-level planning of land-use prescriptions with the help of an advisory system, and taking the specificities of local environment into 
account when defining management requirements; 

strengthening the connection between management requirements and the ecological needs of target species; 

improving monitoring activities to measure the natural and environmental benefits of payments; 

harmonising the programme overall with the Natura 2000 Network. 

The  Integrated  Constructed  Wetland  (ICW)  concept  and  term  was  developed  in  the  1980s  and  1990s  by  the  Irish  Department  of  the 
Environment,  Heritage  and  Local  Government.  The  subsequent  initiative  was  taken  forward  by  the  Irish  National  Parks  and  Wildlife 
Service (NPWS). The concept developed from work done in the late 1980s and early 1990s in the 25 km2-water catchment of the Dunhill-
Annestown stream in County Waterford to better manage natural resources for the rural community. The initiative has seen the construction 
of numerous examples of ICWs that have put the concept into practice, and the development of formal guidance produced by the national 
government.  The  concept  aims  to  create  ‘ecological  infrastructures  that  are  largely self-managing,  biologically  self-designing and  which 
have social and economic coherence’. It is intended that these will also help provide additional habitat for species associated with wetlands 
formerly ubiquitous in Ireland. In particular, the ICWs promoted by the initiative mimic in large part the structure and processes found in 
those wetlands dominated by emergent vegetation with shallow water and nutrient-enriched soils. 

Specific objectives: 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

⋅ 

to contain and treat influents within emergent vegetated areas; 

to aesthetically place the containing wetland structure in the local landscape to enhance a site’s ancillary values; 

to improve habitat diversity and nature management; 

to advocate the advantages of restoring some of wetlands’ key environmental services and their associated lost habitat. 

IT  Mirandola 

Urban  Green 
Belt 

Climate 
mitigation 
adaptation 

change 
and 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
zones, 
service 
green  urban  and 
peri-urban areas 

The Local Energy Plan of the municipality of Mirandola, in the Emilia Romagna region, aims to significantly reduce energy consumption 
and contribute to climate change mitigation (20 % energy reduction by 2020). One of the measures is the creation of a green belt around the 
city to provide cooling and shading in summer and store CO2. This is done using ‘transfer of development rights’, whereby developers are 
allowed to increase the size of their buildings if they allot a significant part of their land to green space. The individual green spaces form a 
continuous green belt. Flexible, negotiable development standards encourage developers to participate in town planning and shortens the 
wait for planning permission. The initiative started in 2001 and the first wooded areas were planted in 2003. The related measure ‘Una città 
nel bosco’ (‘A city in the wood’) aims to create a public wooded area of about 1.3 million m2 related to low energy intensity residential 
building programmes. This would include about 440 000 m2 of woodland along the planned Cispadana motorway.  

EN 

19 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Biodiversity 
conservation 

LT  Development 

pilot 

in 

of 
a 
ecological 
network 
southern 
Lithuania 

areas, 
areas, 

artficial 

Core 
restoration 
natural 
connectivity 
features, 
connectivity 
features 

LU  The 

River 

Contract 

Water 
management 

Sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

The  project  duration  is  2010–14  and  it  involves  three  main  activities:  protecting  target  species,  creating  the  ecological  network  and 
educating the local community. The target species of the project are reptiles and amphibian species included in the Habitats Directive and a 
number of birds and invertebrate species that need small standing water  bodies, small  meadows or uncovered sandy slopes. The current 
protected area system in southern Lithuania does not protect these target species enough and does not ensure migration between the most 
bio-ecologically important habitats. The project aims to create ecological corridors in southern Lithuania that should ensure a favourable 
conservation status for species and increase the region’s ecological value.  

Another project activity is to distinguish scientific and legal selection criteria in establishing an ecological network. These criteria will be 
designated  for  the  protection  of  biodiversity  in  general.  It  is  expected  to  cover  the  entire  territory  of  Lithuania.  These  activities  will  be 
coordinated  with  those  of  the  local  communities,  explaining  the  benefits  of  these  actions  for  nature  and  people.  Educational  materials, 
events, articles in local and national newspapers, the project’s webpage and a nature trail will be used to educate the local community about 
the environment. 

The  Contract  for  the  Haute  Sure  River  is  a  cross-border  project,  implemented  with  the  support  of  the  European  Union,  Luxembourg, 
Wallonia (Belgium) and Lorraine (France). Its aim is to design a series of measures to better protect and manage water resources. It relies 
on the participation of the general public and the consultation of all the actors to achieve sustainable, reasonable water management. It aims 
to  combine  measures  to  improve  the  quality  of  water,  biodiversity,  structural  quality  and  water-based  recreation.  It  is  a  multi-annual 
programme to restore, protect and valorise the valley of the Haute Sure and its rivers. Cooperation, dialogue and agreement are key features 
of the project, for which the voluntary participation of actors is crucial. It also seeks to improve inter-town cooperation and coordination 
between different projects in the region. Finally, it is a platform for promoting cultural and landscape heritage and raising awareness among 
all the citizens of the valley, informing them and exchanging experience.  

LV  Protection  and 

Coastal protection  Sustainable 

management 
of 
habitats 

coastal 

use/ecosystem 
service zones 

Until recently, the Latvian coast was spared much negative human impact. As a result, it now possesses an impressive array of habitat types 
— grey, white and wooded dunes, coastal lagoons, boreal Baltic coastal meadows and calcareous fens — but is facing increasing human 
pressure, with more tourists every year. To ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of coastal habitats and species 
of Community importance, the project (2001–06) focused on the following broad objectives: 

⋅  Mapping and evaluating coastal habitats of Community importance in the whole coastal protection belt. 

⋅ 

⋅ 

Planning  the  appropriate  protection  and  management  measures  in  protected  nature  areas  where  there  were  no  nature  conservation 
plans. 

Implementing management measures in the coastal zone in areas with high and increasing visitor activity. 

⋅  Restoring and maintaining coastal meadows and grey dunes in areas where immediate protection is required (cutting trees and bushes, 
mowing,  grazing);  removing  aggressive  alien  plant  species  (in  some  areas  where  they  are  rapidly  expanding  in  distribution  and 
destroying indigenous flora). 

⋅ 

Preparing and disseminating information about the coastal project and about threatened coastal habitats of Community importance and 
their protection. 

EN 

20 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
 
MT  Protection  of 
ecological 
corridors  — 
rubble walls 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

Artificial 
connectivity 
features 

Rubble walls, found all over in Malta, serve as borders between the fields of one farm and another. They also allow excessive rainwater to 
drain from the fields, benefiting agricultural production and minimising soil erosion. They are an important ecological corridor and a refuge 
for  a  number  of  endangered  terrestrial  fauna.  Originally  built  using  the  local  limestone,  these  architectural  features  result  in  a  very 
distinctive  landscape  that  provides  continuity  with  the  historic  features  and  fabric  of  many  villages  and  other  urban  centres.  Over  the 
centuries,  terracing  and  the  construction  of  retaining  dry  rubble  walls  have  allowed  the  extension  of  agricultural  activities  along  steep 
slopes that would otherwise have been considered marginal. Traditionally built, well maintained rubble walls are also important as a habitat 
for many species of flora and fauna and as soil conservation structures. 

NL  Room  for  the 

Flood protection 

River 
programme 

Natural 
connectivity 
features 

To  conserve  and  maintain  these  structures,  the  Government  of Malta  enacted  regulations  for  their  recognition  and  protection  in view  of 
their  environmental,  historical  and  architectural  importance,  their  role  in  the  habitat  for  flora  and  fauna  and  their  vital  importance  in 
conserving the soil and water. These regulations prohibit their unlawful modification through prohibited human activities and provide the 
basis  for  remediation  action.  Funding  for  the  restoration  of  terraced  rubble  walls  was  allocated  in  the  2004–06  and  2007–13  Rural 
Development Programmes. 

The Room for the River programme is undertaking a range of actions to increase the carrying capacity of the main rivers that flow through 
the Netherlands in order to increase the safety of 4 million inhabitants. The programme period is 2006 to 2015 (with a budget of EUR 2.2 
billion)  and  includes  the  secondary  objective  of  enhancing  the  biodiversity  value  of  the  river  basins  where  this  could  be  combined  with 
flood control measures. The programme’s development and implementation is the primary responsibility of the Ministry of Infrastructure 
and the Environment in cooperation with the respective provinces, municipalities and water authorities. Its overall objective is to increase 
the maximum safe flow of the rivers entering the Netherlands to a level that occurs once in 1 250 years. The biodiversity of the river basins 
will  be  enhanced  by  implementing  39  projects  along  the  rivers.  Those  that  can  be  classified  as  Green  Infrastructure  measures  include 
projects to widen and/or lower the floodplain and to flood previously reclaimed land.  

PL 

Improving 
water  storage 
and 
capacity 
preventing 
and 
floods 
drought 
in 
lowland  forest 
ecosystems 

Ecosystem service 
provision 

areas, 

Core 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

This  project’s  objective  is  to  stop  or  slow  down  the  outflow  of  surface  water  in  the  vicinity  of  small  catchment  areas  and  support  the 
development  of  natural  landscape.  The  activities  include  the  construction  or  renovation  of  several  thousand  water  storage  systems  in 
lowland  forests  throughout  the  country.  One  of  the  project’s  major  goals  is  to  support  ecologically  sound  methods  of  water  retention. 
Improving water balance will enhance biodiversity in forest ecosystems and buffer flood and drought events. Other benefits include more 
timber biomass production, better fire control, CO2 sequestration and better water quality for neighbouring communities. The project can 
become the first large-scale effort in Europe to develop small-scale water retention in forests. Financed by cohesion funding, it will benefit 
178 forest districts. The implementation costs from 2007 to 2014 will be about EUR 50 million. 

PT  National 

Ecological 
Reserve 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

areas, 

zones, 

Core 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

A national ecological reserve (REN) is a biophysical structure that integrates all areas, by value and ecological sensitivity or exposure and 
susceptibility to natural hazards that should be given special protection. It defines a network of conservation areas, including coastal and 
riverine areas, aquifer recharge and steep slope areas for erosion protection. Areas included under REN regulations must be identified in 
regional and local plans. Special committees manage the application of this regulation and manage conflicts. They involve local authorities 
and central and regional public agencies. The regulation aims to: 

-  protect  water  and  soil  resources  and  safeguard  systems  and  biophysical  processes  associated  with  coastal  and  terrestrial  water  cycles, 
ensuring the provision of environmental goods and services essential for the development of human activities;  

-  prevent  and  reduce  the  effects  of  the  degradation  of  groundwater  recharge,  flood  risk,  drought,  soil  erosion  and  mass  movements  on 
slopes, thus contributing to adaptation; to connectivity and ecological coherence; and to the realisation of the priorities of the Territorial 

EN 

21 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
Agenda of the European Union and environmental areas of trans-European natural hazards management. 

RO  Lower 

Danube  Green 
Corridor 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

areas, 
areas, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service zones 

The Lower Danube Green Corridor  Agreement was signed in 2000 by the governments of Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine  and Moldova. It 
recognises  a  need  and  shared  responsibility  to  protect  and  sustainably  manage  one  of  the  most  outstanding  biodiversity  regions  in  the 
world. Restoration projects carried out under the auspices of the WWF, which focuses on practical implementation; demonstration projects; 
and  work  with  local  stakeholders  in  particular  to  promote  sustainable  local  development.  This  large-scale  initiative  aims  to  coordinate 
biodiversity conservation and water management among several countries, particularly the conservation of wetlands and the management 
of floodplains. The network includes areas that are strictly protected (including Natura 2000 sites) and areas where economic activities are 
possible, with buffer zones in between. The signatories have committed themselves to establishing the corridor composed of 773 166 ha of 
existing protected areas plus 160 626 ha of proposed new protected areas, (protection for 1 million ha of existing and new protected areas) 
and 223 608 ha of areas proposed to be restored to natural floodplains. 

SE 

Sveaskog 
company 
strategy 

Sustainable  forest 
management 

areas, 
areas, 

zones, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

Sveaskog is a Swedish state-owned forest company with a holding of 15 % of the country’s productive forest land (productive forests cover 
more than half of Sweden’s total land area), making it the largest forest owner in Sweden. It aims to lead the way in the development of all 
kind  of  forest  values.  It  launched  a  programme  with  the  aim  of  using  20 %  of  the  company’s  land  for  biodiversity  protection.  Three 
different strategic tools have been developed to implement the company’s policy and achieve its environmental objectives. They operate at 
different  levels,  thus  reinforcing  and  complementing  each  other.  Additional  measures  such  as  restoring  approximately  50  wetlands, 
developing climate programmes and taking ecosystem services into account, have begun to be implemented. 

(1) Sveaskog is in the process of establishing 36 ecoparks — large, contiguous landscapes with high biological and ecological values — 
throughout Sweden. Their average size is about 5 000 hectares with a range from 1 000 to 20 000 hectares. In total, the ecoparks make up 
for  5 %  of  the  land  holding,  which  corresponds  to  175 000  hectares.  At  least  half  of  the  productive  forest  land  is  used  for  nature 
conservation and ecological values always take precedence over financial values in an ecopark. 

(2) Forests set aside for nature conservation (300 000 hectares of smaller land holdings are used for nature conservation only). Criteria such 
as international responsibility for, and national under-representation of specific forest types, as well as several landscape ecology criteria, 
have been used in selecting forests with high conservation values today, but also with a high ecological potential to recover values in the 
near future. 

(3)  Taking  nature  into  account  in  production  forests  (related  to  regulations  established  in  the  Swedish  forest  act).  All  Sveaskog’s  forest 
holdings  are  certified  in  accordance  with  FSC  standards  in  Sweden.  Individual  trees,  groups  of  trees  or  minor  areas  of  the  forest  are 
preserved during felling. On average, 9 % of every commercial forest stand will be preserved, which amounts to 250 000 hectares. 

EN 

22 

EN 

 
  
SI 

Protection  of 
the Sava River 
floodplains 

Water 
management 

SK  Alpine-

Carpathian 
Corridor 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

Biodiversity 
conservation 

SU  Forest 

Biodiversity 
Programme 
for 
Finland 

southern 

areas, 
areas, 

zones, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

Duration  of  the  project  2007–09.  Following  the  signing  of  an  International  Framework  Agreement  (IFA)  in  December  2003,  Slovenia, 
Croatia,  Serbia  and  Bosnia-Herzegovina  set  up  the  Sava  River  Basin  Commission  in  June  2005.  The  commission’s  priority  task  was  to 
elaborate an Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) plan meeting the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) and 
other EU legislation based on the IFA. The main objectives were to:  

- support transborder cooperation and agreement between the Sava countries to designate and manage an ecological network of protected 
areas, buffer zones and corridors for habitat types and species of European importance;  

- protect global significant biodiversity and support rural development by encouraging sustainable land use practices and rural tourism. 

Natural 
connectivity 
features, 
connectivity 
features 

artficial 

Based on an initial initiative of the Donau-Auen National Park and the Austrian Federal Ministry of Traffic, Innovation and Technology, in 
2002 a range of organisations, from NGOs such as WWF and hunter organisations to Slovakian and Austrian road authorities, decided to 
support the development of green corridors across the  Alps and Carpathians, recognising the importance of implementing  measures that 
support species migration and genetic exchange between the two mountain areas. The partnership resulted in a range of activities in Austria 
and  Slovakia,  from  developing  a  first  green  bridge  in  Austria  to  creating  wildlife  passages  in  Slovakia.  This  was  followed  by  a  project 
called the Alpine-Carpathian Corridor (2008–12), financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Austrian authorities, 
including  scientific  research,  developing  green  bridges  and  integrating  green  corridors  into  spatial  planning  and  awareness-raising.  Its 
overall objective is ‘to safeguard the ecological connectivity between the Alps and the Carpathians by especially embedding instruments of 
spatial  planning  and  to  trigger  sustainable  development  which  considers  the  requirements  of  both  humans  and  wildlife,  focusing  on 
ecological bottlenecks’. 

areas, 
areas, 

zones, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
service 
natural 
connectivity 
features 

The Forest Biodiversity Programme for southern Finland, i.e. the METSO Programme (2008–16) began in 2008 to halt the loss of forest 
biodiversity by improving Finland’s network of protected areas and the forestry methods used in commercially managed forests (METSO 
2011).  The  METSO  Programme  aims  to  improve  the  conservation  of  private  and  state-owned  forests.  The  measures  will  largely  be 
financed through the annual framework budgets allocated to the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 
Previous  government  resolutions  have  already  guaranteed  funding  amounting  to  EUR  182  million  by  2012.  An  important  part  of  the 
programme is voluntary conservation activities that will be carried out through temporary or permanent agreements. The forest owner will 
be compensated for the costs of managing nature on the site and for the loss of income. The voluntary approach is valued by forest owners 
who  also  appreciate  the  independence  in  decision-making  and  the  chance  to  retain  their  property  rights  in  the  conservation  schemes 
available. 

They  can  also  set  up  cooperation  networks  under  the  programme.  The  aim  of  this  is  to  help  them  maintain  broader  forest  landscapes, 
develop  joint  recreational  activities  related  to  forest  biodiversity,  and  manage  valuable  habitats.  A  cooperation  network  can  consist  of 
forests bordering on each other or include forested areas in different municipalities. 

The programme has the following objectives. In terms of extending the protected area network, a total of 96 000 ha of areas voluntarily 
offered by landowners shall be established as private nature reserves or acquired by the state by 2016. In terms of commercially managed 
forests,  the  total  area  of  sites  where  biodiversity  is  safeguarded  (through  management  practices)  in  privately  owned  forests  should  be 
increased by 82 000 to 173 000 hectares by 2016. These sites include 400 to 800 habitat management projects. With regard to state-owned 
forests, proposals should be made for the extension of protected areas of significance for biodiversity on state-owned land by a total area of 
10 000 ha between 2008 and 2010, in connection with natural resource planning processes. 

EN 

23 

EN 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Ecosystem service 
provision 

UK  Cambridge 
Green 
Infrastructure 
Strategy 
and 
Green Vision 

and 
areas, 

Core 
restoration 
sustainable 
use/ecosystem 
zones, 
service 
green  urban/peri-
urban 
areas, 
natural/artficial 
connectivity 
features 

Over the next twenty years, the population of the Cambridge sub-region is expected to increase by approximately 130 000 from its current 
425 000. This increase in population can be seen as an opportunity for improving the quality of life enjoyed by existing communities. The 
housing developments will put pressure on the environment (e.g. in terms of habitat loss, fragmentation and disturbance), but at the same 
time provide opportunities to enhance the adjoining GI, which could link into a strategic network of green spaces. Much will depend on the 
extent to which the existing infrastructure, including GI, can be enhanced to support the scale of growth proposed. The provision of GI has 
therefore  been  identified  as  a  key  priority  for  successfully  implementing  the  growth  agenda.  Subsequent  strategies  and  visions  were 
produced to enable forward-looking approaches for the next 20 to 30 years.  

This is underpinned by the following strategic objectives:  

Connectivity of habitats — the provision of better linkages between existing and proposed GI resources is essential for the success of the 
strategy.  

Multi-functionality — wherever possible, green space in and around settlements should be multi-functional, carefully tailoring various uses 
such as agriculture, access, recreation and biodiversity to the local situation. 

Extended access — better access for everyone, and by sustainable means, including on foot, by bicycle, on horse and in boat to promote a 
healthier lifestyle, is fundamental.  

Landscape enhancement — the strategy should reflect the distinctive patterns of the Cambridgeshire landscape, both in terms of its natural 
and historical and cultural landscapes.  

Biodiversity  enhancement  —  the  strategy  should  reflect  regional  biodiversity  resources,  patterns  and  targets  and  enhance  the  county’s 
distinct natural environments. 

EN 

24 

EN