DGENV, 3 June 2008 Analysis of the potential of the Ecological Footprint and related assessment tools for use in the EU’s Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources Tuesday, 3 June 2008 DG Environment, Av. de Beaulieu 5 -1040 Brussels ENV Room BU-5 4/53 Land and Ecosystems Accounts (LEAC) & net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP) Jean-Louis Weber (EEA)
6
Embed
Land and Ecosystems Accounts (LEAC) & net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP)
Analysis of the potential of the Ecological Footprint and related assessment tools for use in the EU’s Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources Tuesday, 3 June 2008 DG Environment, Av. de Beaulieu 5 -1040 Brussels ENV Room BU-5 4/53. Land and Ecosystems Accounts (LEAC) & - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
DGENV, 3 June 2008
Analysis of the potential of the Ecological Footprint and related assessment tools for use in the EU’s Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources
Tuesday, 3 June 2008DG Environment, Av. de Beaulieu 5 -1040 Brussels
ENV Room BU-5 4/53
Land and Ecosystems Accounts (LEAC)&
net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP)
Jean-Louis Weber (EEA)
DGENV, 3 June 2008
The questions behind ecosystem accounting• Risks of unsustainable use of the living natural capital are ignored:
the negative impacts of over-harvesting, force-feeding with fertilisers, intoxication, introduction of species, fragmentation by roads, or sealing of soil by urban development have no direct monetary counterpart.
• The natural capital is not even amortised in accounting books of companies and in the national accounts – no allowance is made for maintaining ecosystems’ critical functions and services. The full cost of the domestic products is not covered in many cases by their price.
• This is as well the case of the price of imported products made from degraded ecosystems: their full cost is not covered by their price.
• Actual value for people of free ecosystem services is not accounted (the market tells: price is zero).
DGENV, 3 June 2008
Aggregates: integrated indicators valid at multiple scalesThis is not only a scientific, technical or data issue but a governance issue
• Government scale: regions, countries (Unions of…) – framing and
implementing policies, tradeoffs, monitoring
• Global scale: global market and global ecosystem (atmosphere, oceans, biodiversity, river catchments…) – common objectives, conventions, monitoring, global mitigation
• Some indicators are scale-specific, other indicators are valid at multiple scales: ecological potential, HANPP, virtual land, cost of maintenance and restoration of ecosystems
net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP):a multi-scale indicator developed by the EEA from LEAC
DGENV, 3 June 2008
The making of nLEP
Corine land cover (derived from satellite images)
Green Background Landscape Index (derived from CLC)
Naturilis (derived from Natura2000 & CDDA)
Effective Mesh Size (MEFF, derived from TeleAtlas and CLC)
net Landscape Ecological Potential (nLEP) 2000, by 1km² grid cell
nLEP 2000 by NUTS 2/3
DGENV, 3 June 2008
1990
Measuring change: LEAC/nLEP 1990-2000 • Change in Ecological Potential of SES Wetlands,
ES,FR, IT, GR – 10 km strip
Change 1990-20002000
DGENV, 3 June 2008
nLEP at the local level: e.g. effect of land cover change
UnitsAMVRAKIKOS
GREECECAMARGUE
FRANCEDANUBE DELTA
ROMANIADOÑANA
SPAIN
km² 1802 827 5858 1473
Urban temperature 2000 0-100 1.6 0.3 1.3 0.5
Change in Urban temperature 1990-2000 0-100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Intensive Agriculture Temperature 2000 0-100 15.8 25.0 11.8 13.4
Change in Intensive Agriculture temperature 1990-2000
0-100 0.1 1.0 0.2 0.7
Landscape Net Ecological Potential 2000 0-100 n.a 39.5 n.a 48.2
Change in Landscape Net Ecological Potential 1990-2000
0-100 n.a -0.7 n.a -1.1
Nature designation index (combined N2000 & national)
0-100 21.5 96.1 90.7 80.0
Mean Effective Mesh Size in SES 2005 logN(MEFF) n.a 150.8 n.a 189.1
Population Density (inhab/km²) 2000 inhabitants 57.9 26.5 7.5 7.5
Surface of coastal Wetland SES
Wetland Socio-Ecological Systems
ME
AN
VA
LU
ES
PE
R K
M²
Overall budget of the Natural Regional Park of Camargue