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

• Action scale: local communities, conservations agencies, companies, citizens – management, development, production, consumption, mitigation

• 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

2 620 000 €2 440 000 €2 360 000 €1 744 000 €TOTAL

1 020 000 €790 000 €760 000 €254 000 €Field actions’ budget

1 600 000 €1 650 000 €1 600 000 €1 490 000 €Staff and other fix costs

2008200720062005

2 620 000 €2 440 000 €2 360 000 €1 744 000 €TOTAL

1 020 000 €790 000 €760 000 €254 000 €Field actions’ budget

1 600 000 €1 650 000 €1 600 000 €1 490 000 €Staff and other fix costs

2008200720062005

PNRC, 2008.

Next step: calculation of ecosystem maintenance & restoration costs