Reality check

Page 8

B

iodiversity in Europe has been declining for decades and a major cause of this decline is agricultural change. Agriculture is the largest land use in Europe, accounting for almost half of the total EU-27 land area. Its impacts are therefore far-reaching. Rapid changes to farming systems in the post-war decades allowed an unprecedented increase in agricultural productivity, but had severe impacts on biodiversity1. The European Union and its Member States are contracting parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. In 2001, the EU Heads of State made the commitment to halt the decline of biodiversity in the EU by 2010 and to restore habitats and natural systems. In 2002, they also joined some 130 world leaders in agreeing to significantly reduce the rate of global biodiversity loss by 2010. In May 2006, the European Commission adopted a communication on “Halting Biodiversity Loss by 2010 – and Beyond: Sustaining ecosystem services for human well-being”, which underlined the importance of biodiversity protection as a pre-requisite for sustainable development, as well as setting out a detailed EU Biodiversity Action Plan to achieve this. Natura 2000 is the centrepiece of the EU nature and biodiversity policy. It is an EU-wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive. Natura 2000 is composed of Speacial Areas of conservation, designated under the Habitats Directive, and Special Protected Areas, designated by the oldest EU nature legislation, the 1979 Birds Directive. The aim of the network is to assure the long-term survival of Europe’s most valuable and threatened species and habitats. The EU Biodiversity Action Plan addresses the challenge of integrating biodiversity concerns into other policy areas in a unified way, and identifying funding commensurate to this ambitious task. The CAP is meant to provide major financing opportunities for biodiversity conservation in the EU2. Despite these commitments, the EU has failed to meet its biodiversity protection objective3, with agricultural habitats and species showing particularly poor conservation status4, and CAP instruments not being targeted for this purpose5. This year, EU Heads of State have renewed their commitment to reversing biodiversity loss and have adopted a very ambitious target6 that cannot be met without a profound transformation of our agricultural landscapes.

The net impact of agriculture on biodiversity and the wider environment is therefore strictly dependent on the type of farming systems and practices deployed. For example, mixed farming systems tend to be more beneficial to biodiversity than specialised arable farms, and haymaking generally performs better than silage. Another risk to farmland biodiversity is associated with the abandonment of extensive farming systems. Targeting support to the right farming systems and practices is crucial if CAP funding is to benefit biodiversity. 1. Stoate C, Báldi A, Beja P, Boatman ND, Herzon I, van Doorn A, de Snoo GR, Rakosy L & Ramwell C (2009) Ecological impacts of early 21st century agricultural change in Europe – A review. Journal of Environmental Management 91: 22-46. 2. European Commission (2004) Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on financing Natura 2000. COM(2004) 431 final. 3. European Commission (2009) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. Composite report on the conservation status of habitat types and species as required under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive. COM(2009) 358 final. Spanish Ministry of Environment, Rural and Marine Affairs (2010) “Cibeles” piorities – halting the loss of biodiversity in Europe. 4. European Environment Agency (2009b) Progress towards the European 2010 biodiversity target. 5. BirdLife International (2009a) Through the green smokescreen. How is CAP cross compliance delivering for biodiversity? BirdLife International (2009b) Could do better. How is EU rural development policy delivering for biodiversity? 6. Council of the European Union (15 March 2010) Council conclusions on biodiversity post-2010 – EU and global vision and targets and international access and burden sharing regime.

BirdLife International · Reality Check

Although, agricultural expansion into natural habitats and intensive agricultural systems can have severe negative impacts on biodiversity, properly managed agricultural habitats in Europe can be of critical importance to biodiversity conservation. The European Environment Agency estimates that 50% of all species in Europe depend on agricultural habitats, including a number of endemic and threatened species. This is both because of the territorial dominance of agricultural land use and because of the way in which historic, low intensity land management has resulted in rich species assemblages.

7


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.