Mart Külvik Estonia

1. The concept of ecological networks and “green corridors”. Design and implementation. Current status and trends with focus on Europe.Transboundary cooperation Mart Külvik Estonia

2. content • Concept, terms, philosophy • Status and trends: European policies • Upside down approach • Bottom-up approach

3. Concept, terms, philosophy

4. concept Ecological networks– coherent assemblages of areas representing natural and semi-natural landscape elements that need to be conserved, managed or, where appropriate, enriched or restored in order to ensure the favourable conservation status of ecosystems, habitats, species and landscapes of regional importance across their traditional range (Bennett, 1998)

5. terms wide range of names worldwide: • greenways in the USA, Australia and New Zealand • ecological infrastructure, ecological framework • extensive open space systems, multiple use nodules, wildlife corridors, landscape restoration network • habitat networks, territorial systems of ecological stability, framework of landscape stability • the network of ecologically compensating areas

6. Core area Landscape corridor Core area Stepping stone corridor Core area Linear corridor Bufferzone Restoration area components • Core areas • Corridors • Buffer zones • Restoration areas

7. Variety of ecological networks appearance

8. why ecological network needed? • Changing land-use patterns is creating fragmented habitats • Stress for ecosystems is increasing • Number of threatened and endangered species is expanding

9. philosophy of econet • The underlying philosophy of the establishment of an econet is to promote synergy between existing nature policies, land-use planning, rural and urban development. • Econet offers a dynamic framework for integrating several sectors policies in relation to nature conservation and management that will build on and benefit from the existing agreements, programmes and initiatives. • Econet does not only consists of legally protected areas, valuable landscapes and habitats are not restricted protected areas only. Corridors and buffer zones very often maintained or managed by different land-use sectors.

10. Status and trends: European policies

11. status and trends Central part of an international political process: the establishment of Pan-European Ecological Network (PEEN) is a priority theme of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (PEBLDS),endorsed in 1995 at 3rd “Environment for Europe” (EfE) Ministerial Conference, Sofia

12. The target of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy: ‘To ensure that a full range of ecosystems, habitats, species and their genetic diversity and landscape of European importance are conserved; habitats are large enough to place species in a favourable conservation status; there are sufficient opportunities for dispersal and migration of species; damaged elements of the network are restored and the system is buffered from potential threats’ (PEBLDS, 1995)

13. 5th EfE Ministerial Conference in Kyiv, May 2003: biodiversity resolution endorsed by Environment Ministers: • target 2006: PEEN will be identified and reflected on coherentindicative European maps in all States of the Pan-European region, • target 2008: all core areas adequately conserved and the PEEN gives guidance to all major national, regional and international land use and planning policies + to the operations of relevant economic and financial sectors.

14. Upside down approach

15. Indicative map of the Pan-European Ecological Network in CEE:AREA

16. Methodology: basic lines of reasoning

17. Basic map 1: internationally designated sites

18. Basic map 2: internationally acknowledged sites

19. Basic map 3: PEEN habitats map

20. Analysis steps: Step 1. Determine large non-fragmented ‘natural’ habitat (complexes) that fulfil species demands Step 2. Add on corridors: Known migration and potential dispersal routes Step 3. Estimation of patch sites that support key populations of indicator species Step 4. GIS analysis

22. Indicative map of the Pan-European Ecological Network in SEE:AREA

23. Project team • Albania: Directorate of Nature Protection • Bosnia and Herzegovina: Agricultural Institute • Bulgaria: Wilderness fund • Croatia:University of Zagreb • Macedonia: Agency of Environment • Serbia-Montenegro: Institute for Nature Conservation • Slovenia: Center for Cartography Fauna and Flora • Turkey: WWF Turkey • LEAD: European Centre for Nature Conservation

24. Bottom-up approach

26. Objectives of the project • to develop the concepts and methodologies for national ecological networksin Baltics; • to implement the concept of ecological network at state level and in pilot areas at county level; • to develop maps, databases and action plansfor implementation of National Ecological Networks. 3

28. Ecological network of Lithuania

29. Traffic accidents with large mammals (by L.Klein) To supplement the green network at county level 1 IUCN Regional Office for Europe

30. Large natural and semi-natural areas 21 IUCN Regional Office for Europe

35. conclusions • Ecological greenway networks have huge potentials in ecological perspectives but also to unite Europe. • Among the most important potentials is their function as both an ecological and social network on different levels. • The network has a potential to increase co-ordination across the “human borders” of administrations, countries, regions and local spots and to increase co-operation between administrative sectors, local people and NGOs. • The real potential of the ecological networks is, however, that they might potentially widen our – conservationists’ -- understanding of interaction with nature in a socio-economic context.

36. Many thanks for your attention!