COUNT: Implementing a Transactional Environmental Support System for Europe

1. www.tess-project.eu A Transactional Environmental Support System for Europe: Implementation through COUNT (COnservationUNited in Trust) Robert Kenward, TESS Science Supervisor Funded by the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n̊ 212304 ENV.2007.4.2.1.1. Methodologies for scaling down to regional & local level the analysis of policy impacts on multifunctional land uses & economic activity

2. What this presentation does A little history Recap from last November Progress of TESS so far Planning for implementation: COUNT Synergies with CHM & Lifewatch

3. Some Conservation History • .... 1950 Local protection and sustainable use • 1979 Major European protection instruments. • Convention on Biological Diversity recognises importance of Sustainable Use in 13 of 19 substantive articles • 2000 Natura 2000 • World Summit on Sustainable Development socio-economic as well as environment • 2004 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment • 2010 International Year of Biodiversity

4. Europe has not halted loss of biodiversity by 2010. WHY? Understanding of causes is growing. For 30 declining bird species in UK, Prof. Ian Newton (2004, Ibis 146:579-600) identifies: (i) weed control, (ii) early ploughing, (iii) grassland management, (iv) intensified stocking, (v) hedgerow loss & (vi) predation. All can be addressed, in many cases by de-intensification measures that have low cost The big issue is LandUse; most Land is outside Protected Areas; Use continues inside There is lots of knowledge but not joined up

5. Joining many threads: 1980s Development of individual-based models.

6. Individual-based models of: predator from radio-tracking and prey

7. Need movements & home- ranges related to habitats One-click selections Habitat map editor Spreadsheet location editor File browser Extensive online help

8. Remote mapping (CEH Landcover 1990) is marvellous, but scale restricts detail, Ground-based for detail, (by Swedish hunters, 1985) so is best in combination with local mapping (eg. farm plans, civic groups) and species monitoring (e.g. by wildlife watchers, hunters & anglers).

9. Joining many threads: 1980s Development of individual-based models. 2001 Report of Council of Europe to Kiev high level conference proposes integrating complex knowledge for Livelihoods & Biodiversity. 2002 Technology Transfer review in CEH finds 40 software contributions for decision support.

10. e.g. Environmental Information System for Planners Land stability Subsidence Pollution Flood Hazard Biodiversity A prototype demonstrator that provided Complex Knowledge to help planners apply environment data and understanding in the planning process. Origin: BGS, CEH and Nottingham University

11. Some capabilities Flooding Managing Waste Biodiversity Typical annual deposition of sulphur from a power station. Subsidence Pollution

12. Joining many threads: 1980s Development of individual-based models. 2001 Report of Council of Europe to Kiev high level conference proposes integrating complex knowledge for Livelihoods & Biodiversity. 2002 Technology Transfer review in CEH finds 40 software contributions for decision support. How to fund? 1. Raise awareness 2. Build system 2004 FP6 bid: Governance and Ecosystem Management for Conservation of Biodiversity (www.gemconbio.eu) (highest mark in round)

13. Primarily public goods, regulated and public funded. Biodiversity needed? Extensively private goods; but livestock & intensive crops have impacts on biodiversity. Science, Education, Recreation; can all benefit from biodiversity & provide incentives to restore. BUT HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN? 2004: Millennium AssessmentEcosystem Services from Land Use Supporting Regulating Provisioning Cultural

14. Governance & Ecosystem Management for Conservation of Biodiversity (GEMCONBIO) Pan-European Survey: Use of Wild Resources Recreational fishing(EuropeanAnglersAlliance) Bird-watching (Birdlife Partners) Collecting fungi (European Council Cons. Fungi) Collecting wild plant materials (Plantlife) Hunting (Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation of the EU) 27 country coordinators, 19 languages

15. SPEND:HuntingAnglingWatching (private) €16 €19€8 in 2006 billionbillionbillion in the EU GEMCONBIO survey of hunting, angling, watching: 34 million adults (7% population) spend >€40 billion. • In 2006, equivalent US spending was $120 billion • €40 billion is about €200 for each cultivated EU ha • CAP agri-environment budget is ca €8 billion/year • It costs €6 billion to run Natura 2000

16. 7th Framework Programme Theme 6: Environment (Including Climate Change). ENV.2007.4.2.1.1. Methodologies for scaling down to the regional and local level the analysis of policy impacts on multifunctional land uses and economic activity Strategic Objective: To design a decision support system related to environment and land use that will enable policy makers to integrate knowledge from the regional and local level into the decision making process, while also encouraging local people to maintain & restore biodiversity & ecosystem services.

17. How? An exchange between local stakeholders & central policymakers Decision support for managers of land and species: Councils,Farmers, Foresters, Reserve managers, Anglers, Hunters, Access Interests 1. What does central policy and planning have? Capability to produce complex knowledge. 2. What does central policy and planning need? Local knowledge and local actions. 3. What do local managers of land & species have? Local knowledge & capabilities (skill, cash, time). 4. What do local managers of land & species need? Complex knowledge to guide their actions.

18. Exchanging decision-support for local knowledge and actions

19. TESS abstract Europe is losing biodiversity and ability to provide ecosystem services. Formal Environmental Assessment processes (Impact, Strategic) give some protection. However, individual local stakeholders who manage land and species also make daily informal decisions, within an envelope of regulations and fiscal incentives but based mainly on local environments. The myriad small decisions summate to change land use.

20. WP2 Central Survey design Workshop& report WP3 Local Survey design Workshop& report WP5 Cases Pan-Euro local & central survey Local mapping & projects & report 0 M O N T H 12 M O N T H 24 30 GANTT-like TESS work-packages NOW

21. Approximately how many management decisions, on average, do you (or people you represent) make annually that affect the environment in any way? Who makes local decisions? 1000 100 10 Number of Decisions Council Farmer Fishing Hunting Forester Reserve (LAU2) Manager Manager Manager

22. In terms of area managed, decisions are mainly made informally by individual stakeholders 1000 1 0.001 Relative Density of Decisions Council Farmer Fishing Hunting Forester Reserve (LAU2) Manager Manager Manager

25. TESS survey design in a series of work-packages WP2 Central Survey design Workshop& report WP3 Local Survey design Workshop& report WP5 Cases Pan-Euro local & central survey Local mapping & projects & report WP4 Models Audit of models Database complete, reported Gap analysis WP6 Policy + Internet Survey, analysis, policy document TESS internet design & report 0 M O N T H 12 24 30 NOW Brussels Conference

26. We seek to complement formal assessment with an internet-based Transactional Environmental Support System that: (a) collates all ways to leverage biodiversity enhancement, uses models to predict economic & biodiversity impacts of small-scale actions, and delivers context-adaptive decision support, so that local people can optimise incomes from ecosystem services, in exchange for (b) information on their decisions, and monitored results, which integrate to support decisions ofcentral assessors for adaptive governance (regulations & fiscal incentives).

27. Description of Work p 26 (System Design) While conducting this project we will approach commercial information technology enterprises to identify interest in constructing a prototype system. Pilot work with limited features, would facilitate to handle more topics. We will also consider the potential for a single environmental support system to deliver other information to local communities across Europe. TESS task 6.1

28. Q.How to get people to use a conservation-through-use TESS that benefits biodiversity? A.By building it into a portal that is very attractive because it benefits livelihoods and recreation of those using land and species. Q. How to design that portal & fund the build? A. By asking (a) organisations AND (b) individuals what services they would like it to provide AND what they are prepared to pay. Task 6.3 Socio-economic Design

29. Finding stakeholder requirements through COUNT (COnservationUNited in Trust): European Landowners Organisation Confederation of European Forest Owners European Angling Alliance Hunters (FACE) Gatherers (ECCF, Plantlife) Watchers (BTO, Birdlife, WWF) Government agencies & local authorities Academic institutions & Country Coordinators Towards COUNT

30. COUNT Conservation through Unified-knowledge and Trust

31. 1. Survey by TESS partners of requirements of organisations that assist users of environmental resources; 2. Creation of COUNT web-site based on the priorities of the responding stakeholder organisations; 3. Inflow from individuals of more extensive data on information priorities and willingness to pay; 4. Write-up socio-economic design findings in TESS Work Package 6; present to European Commission; 5. Further web-site development by COUNT based on interest in site and willingness to pay. More

32. Stages

33. What natural resources organisations and individuals are using & participant numbers What issues they want addressed as a priority for conserving those resources How much organisations and individuals are prepared to pay What capabilities for awareness-raising etc are available in organisations What socio-economic factors and approach across states maximise the above Information gathering: Survey in 20 European Languages

34. 1. On-site information on topics in all languages, initially a livelihoods + conservation rationale and some case study examples; but also: 2. Links to membership organisations, shopping and other information suppliers; 3. On site and in all languages for mapping and to linked services for species-monitoring; 4. Surveys on priority for further development of site content; and later: 5. A livelihoods + conservation wiki; and finally, modelling-based forecasting tools. Local Delivery of Environmental Information

35. COUNT • The COUNT vision is to enlighten, encourage and empower local communities to support biodiversity restoration across Europe, through an internet system that unifies knowledge to guide decisions of benefit for biodiversity & livelihoods. • OBJECTIVES • To raise awareness of opportunities for conservation from use of biodiversity & ecosystem services; • To encourage those who benefit from biodiversity to conserve it and become its ambassadors; • To empower in conservation activities the organisations whose members benefit from biodiversity; and • To provide the internet system that unifies knowledge to guide decisions of benefit for biodiversity and livelihoods, and that will help the research & monitoring needed to make the system better and better. Conservation through Unified-knowledge and Trust

36. SUMMARY www.tess-project.eu Planning since 2001 Local, where impacts are mostly unregulated Integrating research for modelling rapidly Exchanging maps for decision support Livelihoods as well as environment (win-win) Social participation and adaptive governance Self-funding long-term through adding value

37. Synergy / Complementarity Delivery to local, different stakeholders Citizen science aids climate-change decisions In situ mapping, focus on habitats Emphasis on private/voluntary funding Could CoCos and CHM reps work together? Communication with local stakeholders Practical help with specialist translation Support for CHM/BISE development

38. Thank youfor listening www.tess-project.eu