Mapping green infrastructure based on ecosystem services and ecological networks: A Pan-European case study.

Identifying, promoting and preserving a strategically planned green infrastructure (GI) network can provide ecological, economic and social benefits. It has also become a priority for the planning and decision-making process in sectors such as conservation, (land) resource efficiency, agriculture, forestry or urban development. In this paper we propose a methodology that can be used to identify and map GI elements at landscape level based on the notions of ecological connectivity, multi-functionality of ecosystems and maximisation of benefits both for humans and for natural conservation. Our approach implies, first, the quantification and mapping of the natural capacity to deliver ecosystem services and, secondly, the identification of core habitats and wildlife corridors for biota. All this information is integrated and finally classified in a two-level GI network. The methodology is replicable and flexible (it can be tailored to the objectives and priorities of the practitioners); and it can be used at different spatial scales for research, planning or policy implementation. The method is applied in a continental scale analysis covering the EU-27 territory, taking into account the delivery of eight regulating and maintenance ecosystem services and the requirements of large mammals’ populations. The best performing areas for ecosystem services and/or natural habitat provision cover 23% of Europe and are classified as the core GI network. Another 16% of the study area with relatively good ecological performance is classified as the subsidiary GI network. There are large differences in the coverage of the GI network among countries ranging from 73% of the territory in Estonia to 6% in Cyprus. A potential application of these results is the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy, assuming that the core GI network might be crucial to maintain biodiversity and natural capital and, thus, should be conserved; while the subsidiary network could be restored to increase both the ecological and social resilience. This kind of GI analysis could be also included in the negotiations of the European Regional Development Funds or the Rural Development Programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]