"Mind the gap!"

How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?

Bernd Gruber, Douglas Evans, Klaus Henle, Bianca Bauch, Dirk Schmeller, Frank Dziock, Pierre-Yves Henry, Szabolcs Lengyel, Chris Margules, Carsten Dormann

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    42 Citations (Scopus)
    3 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Setting aside protected areas is widely recognized as one of the most effective measures to prevent species from extinction. Accordingly, there has been a tremendous effort by governments worldwide to establish protected areas, resulting in over 100,000 sites, which are set aside, to achieve the 10% target proposed at the Fourth World Park Congress in 1992 in Caracas. The main effort of the European Union to achieve this target is the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, comprising over 25,000 sites representing 18% of the area of the 27 Member States of the European Union. The designation of Natura 2000 sites was based on species and habitats listed in the Annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directive. The effectiveness of the selection process and the resulting Natura 2000 network has often been questioned as each country made its designations largely independently and in most cases without considering the theories of optimal reserve site selection. However, the effectiveness of the selection process and the Natura 2000 network has never been explicitly analysed at the European scale. Here we present such an analysis focusing on the representation of Annex II species of the Habitats Directive in the Natura 2000 network relative to a random allocation of species to sites. Our results show that the network is ffective in covering target species and minimizing the number of gap species (i.e. species not represented in a single site of the Natura 2000 network). We demonstrate that the representation is uneven among species. Some species are overrepresented and many species are only represented in a low number of sites. We show that this is mainly due to differing patterns in species ranges, as wide-spread species are nevitably represented in many sites, but narrow ranged species are often covered only by a small number of sites in a particular area. inally, we propose a representation index that detects species that are underrepresented and could be used to direct future conservation efforts.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)45-62
    Number of pages18
    JournalNature Conservation
    Volume3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2012

    Fingerprint

    protected area
    European Union
    habitat
    set-aside
    site selection
    extinction
    bird
    directive
    congress
    allocation
    analysis
    world
    index

    Cite this

    Gruber, Bernd ; Evans, Douglas ; Henle, Klaus ; Bauch, Bianca ; Schmeller, Dirk ; Dziock, Frank ; Henry, Pierre-Yves ; Lengyel, Szabolcs ; Margules, Chris ; Dormann, Carsten. / "Mind the gap!" : How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?. In: Nature Conservation. 2012 ; Vol. 3. pp. 45-62.
    @article{5b5357358f5846728d0650de59e49df5,
    title = "{"}Mind the gap!{"}: How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?",
    abstract = "Setting aside protected areas is widely recognized as one of the most effective measures to prevent species from extinction. Accordingly, there has been a tremendous effort by governments worldwide to establish protected areas, resulting in over 100,000 sites, which are set aside, to achieve the 10{\%} target proposed at the Fourth World Park Congress in 1992 in Caracas. The main effort of the European Union to achieve this target is the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, comprising over 25,000 sites representing 18{\%} of the area of the 27 Member States of the European Union. The designation of Natura 2000 sites was based on species and habitats listed in the Annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directive. The effectiveness of the selection process and the resulting Natura 2000 network has often been questioned as each country made its designations largely independently and in most cases without considering the theories of optimal reserve site selection. However, the effectiveness of the selection process and the Natura 2000 network has never been explicitly analysed at the European scale. Here we present such an analysis focusing on the representation of Annex II species of the Habitats Directive in the Natura 2000 network relative to a random allocation of species to sites. Our results show that the network is ffective in covering target species and minimizing the number of gap species (i.e. species not represented in a single site of the Natura 2000 network). We demonstrate that the representation is uneven among species. Some species are overrepresented and many species are only represented in a low number of sites. We show that this is mainly due to differing patterns in species ranges, as wide-spread species are nevitably represented in many sites, but narrow ranged species are often covered only by a small number of sites in a particular area. inally, we propose a representation index that detects species that are underrepresented and could be used to direct future conservation efforts.",
    keywords = "Biodiversity conservation, gap species, Natura 2000 network, reserve site selection, Habitats Directive, reserve system, conservation planning.",
    author = "Bernd Gruber and Douglas Evans and Klaus Henle and Bianca Bauch and Dirk Schmeller and Frank Dziock and Pierre-Yves Henry and Szabolcs Lengyel and Chris Margules and Carsten Dormann",
    year = "2012",
    doi = "10.3897/natureconservation.3.3732",
    language = "English",
    volume = "3",
    pages = "45--62",
    journal = "Nature Conservation",
    issn = "1314-3301",
    publisher = "Pensoft Publishers",

    }

    Gruber, B, Evans, D, Henle, K, Bauch, B, Schmeller, D, Dziock, F, Henry, P-Y, Lengyel, S, Margules, C & Dormann, C 2012, '"Mind the gap!": How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?', Nature Conservation, vol. 3, pp. 45-62. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.3.3732

    "Mind the gap!" : How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest? / Gruber, Bernd; Evans, Douglas; Henle, Klaus; Bauch, Bianca; Schmeller, Dirk; Dziock, Frank; Henry, Pierre-Yves; Lengyel, Szabolcs; Margules, Chris; Dormann, Carsten.

    In: Nature Conservation, Vol. 3, 2012, p. 45-62.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - "Mind the gap!"

    T2 - How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?

    AU - Gruber, Bernd

    AU - Evans, Douglas

    AU - Henle, Klaus

    AU - Bauch, Bianca

    AU - Schmeller, Dirk

    AU - Dziock, Frank

    AU - Henry, Pierre-Yves

    AU - Lengyel, Szabolcs

    AU - Margules, Chris

    AU - Dormann, Carsten

    PY - 2012

    Y1 - 2012

    N2 - Setting aside protected areas is widely recognized as one of the most effective measures to prevent species from extinction. Accordingly, there has been a tremendous effort by governments worldwide to establish protected areas, resulting in over 100,000 sites, which are set aside, to achieve the 10% target proposed at the Fourth World Park Congress in 1992 in Caracas. The main effort of the European Union to achieve this target is the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, comprising over 25,000 sites representing 18% of the area of the 27 Member States of the European Union. The designation of Natura 2000 sites was based on species and habitats listed in the Annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directive. The effectiveness of the selection process and the resulting Natura 2000 network has often been questioned as each country made its designations largely independently and in most cases without considering the theories of optimal reserve site selection. However, the effectiveness of the selection process and the Natura 2000 network has never been explicitly analysed at the European scale. Here we present such an analysis focusing on the representation of Annex II species of the Habitats Directive in the Natura 2000 network relative to a random allocation of species to sites. Our results show that the network is ffective in covering target species and minimizing the number of gap species (i.e. species not represented in a single site of the Natura 2000 network). We demonstrate that the representation is uneven among species. Some species are overrepresented and many species are only represented in a low number of sites. We show that this is mainly due to differing patterns in species ranges, as wide-spread species are nevitably represented in many sites, but narrow ranged species are often covered only by a small number of sites in a particular area. inally, we propose a representation index that detects species that are underrepresented and could be used to direct future conservation efforts.

    AB - Setting aside protected areas is widely recognized as one of the most effective measures to prevent species from extinction. Accordingly, there has been a tremendous effort by governments worldwide to establish protected areas, resulting in over 100,000 sites, which are set aside, to achieve the 10% target proposed at the Fourth World Park Congress in 1992 in Caracas. The main effort of the European Union to achieve this target is the Natura 2000 network of protected areas, comprising over 25,000 sites representing 18% of the area of the 27 Member States of the European Union. The designation of Natura 2000 sites was based on species and habitats listed in the Annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directive. The effectiveness of the selection process and the resulting Natura 2000 network has often been questioned as each country made its designations largely independently and in most cases without considering the theories of optimal reserve site selection. However, the effectiveness of the selection process and the Natura 2000 network has never been explicitly analysed at the European scale. Here we present such an analysis focusing on the representation of Annex II species of the Habitats Directive in the Natura 2000 network relative to a random allocation of species to sites. Our results show that the network is ffective in covering target species and minimizing the number of gap species (i.e. species not represented in a single site of the Natura 2000 network). We demonstrate that the representation is uneven among species. Some species are overrepresented and many species are only represented in a low number of sites. We show that this is mainly due to differing patterns in species ranges, as wide-spread species are nevitably represented in many sites, but narrow ranged species are often covered only by a small number of sites in a particular area. inally, we propose a representation index that detects species that are underrepresented and could be used to direct future conservation efforts.

    KW - Biodiversity conservation

    KW - gap species

    KW - Natura 2000 network

    KW - reserve site selection

    KW - Habitats Directive

    KW - reserve system

    KW - conservation planning.

    U2 - 10.3897/natureconservation.3.3732

    DO - 10.3897/natureconservation.3.3732

    M3 - Article

    VL - 3

    SP - 45

    EP - 62

    JO - Nature Conservation

    JF - Nature Conservation

    SN - 1314-3301

    ER -