Back to Search Start Over

The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States

The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States

Authors :
Gerhard Weiss
Georg Winkel
Jessica de Koning
Maria Geitzenauer
Francesca Ferranti
Metodi Sotirov
Marieke Blondet
Universität für Bodenkultur Wien [Vienne, Autriche] (BOKU)
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
Laboratoire d'Economie Forestière (LEF)
AgroParisTech-Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA)
Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (MNHN)
Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR)
Nature Society Consultancy in Research and Publishing
Partenaires INRAE
University of Freiburg [Freiburg]
European Forest Institute = Institut Européen de la Forêt = Euroopan metsäinstituutti (EFI)
BiodivERsA Network
National Funding Agency Austrian Science Funds [I 240-B17]
National Funding Agency French Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR-08-BDVA-005-03]
National Funding Agency German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [01LC0814A Biodiversa]
National Funding Agency Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
Source :
Forest Policy and Economics 82 (2017), Forest Policy and Economics, Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, 2017, 82, pp.3-13. ⟨10.1016/j.forpol.2017.03.008⟩, Forest Policy and Economics, 82, 3-13
Publication Year :
2017

Abstract

International audience; Natura 2000, which is the core pillar of the European Union's biodiversity conservation policy, is an ambitious and complex venture that requires funding to be successful. A major challenge is said to be a lack of available funding, and a low uptake of allocated funds is also reported. However, in in-depth analysis has still not been produced to assess the approaches to funding, the reasons for these approaches and their impact regarding the achievement of the aims of Natura 2000. Thus, with this article, we intend to fill this gap. To accomplish this, a case study analysis was carried out in six selected EU Member States: Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK In our study, we perceived different approaches which we sum up to two main types of approaches that were present in the Member States to different degrees. The first type was to find the funding necessary for the required activities, and the second was to delay the implementation of Natura 2000. The major reasons for the different approaches were related to domestic political power realities. The funding approaches impacted onto the attractiveness of EU co-financing instruments, and the sustainability of the schemes. Alternative approaches were either absent or declining in importance. The economic benefits were not perceived on the ground. We conclude that neither a "one size fits all" approach to funding Natura 2000 will work nor will a universal claim for "more money". Therefore, a successful funding strategy ultimately necessitates effective interventions at institutional levels, the business environment and the local level.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
13899341
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Forest Policy and Economics 82 (2017), Forest Policy and Economics, Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, 2017, 82, pp.3-13. ⟨10.1016/j.forpol.2017.03.008⟩, Forest Policy and Economics, 82, 3-13
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....0d7d111f6b5bfa943bb58f7667e2217d
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.03.008⟩