Species, Habitats, Society: An Evaluation of Research Supporting EU's Natura 2000 Network

Abstract

The Natura 2000 network is regarded as one of the conservation success stories in the global effort to protect biodiversity. However, significant challenges remain in Natura 2000 implementation, owing to its rapid expansion, and lack of a coherent vision for its future. Scientific research is critical for identifying conservation priorities, setting management goals, and reconciling biodiversity protection and society in the complex political European landscape. Thus, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive evaluation of published Natura 2000 research to highlight prevalent research themes, disciplinary approaches, and spatial entities. We conducted a systematic review of 572 scientific articles and conference proceedings focused on Natura 2000 research, published between 1996 and 2014. We grouped these articles into ‘ecological’ and ‘social and policy’ categories. Using a novel application of network analysis of article keywords, we found that Natura 2000 research forms a cohesive small-world network, owing to the emphasis on ecological research (79% of studies, with a strong focus on spatial conservation planning), and the underrepresentation of studies addressing ‘social and policy’ issues (typically focused on environmental impact assessment, multi-level governance, agri-environment policy, and ecosystem services valuation). ‘Ecological’ and ‘social and policy’ research shared only general concepts (e.g., Natura 2000, Habitats Directive) suggesting a disconnection between these disciplines. The UK and the Mediterranean basin countries dominated Natura 2000 research, and there was a weak correlation between number of studies and proportion of national territory protected. Approximately 40% of ‘social and policy’ research and 26% of ‘ecological’ studies highlighted negative implications of Natura 2000, while 21% of studies found positive social and biodiversity effects. We emphasize the need for designing inter- and transdisciplinary research in order to promote a social-ecological understanding of Natura 2000, and advance EU conservation policies.

Effects of different silvicultural measures on plant diversity - the case of the Illyrian Fagus sylvatica habitat type (Natura 2000)

“…Species richness and management are among the most important issues of the scientific research supporting EU's Natura 2000 network (Popescu et al 2014). Nonetheless, studies focusing on the direct ef-321 iForest 9: 318-324 Fig.…”

Stakeholder perceptions in relation to changes in the management of Natura 2000 sites and the causes and consequences of change. : A survey in England, Flanders, France and the Netherlands

“…This might be an indication that the processes that have been initiated by the different governments to adapt the management of the sites in the reviewed areas is starting to have an effect on the actual management of the sites. Existing Natura 2000 literature until now has not provided any information on other studies assessing this aspect of Natura 2000 implementation (Popescu et al 2014). Interestingly enough this opinion does not depend on the respondents actor type.…”

“…Overall limited research -whether ecological, sociological or economic has been undertaken to evaluate the implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directive (Popescu et al 2014). Evaluation research on the impact of the Natura 2000 policy at site level is therefore needed, whether quantitate or qualitative and preferable an evaluation that uses criteria that review ecological, economic and social aspects of implementation.…”

Biosphere Reserves research: a bibliometric analysis

“…First, the social network metric modularity class (Blondel et al 2008;Newman 2006) identified components that are more connected to each other than others, thus representing big thematic fields or research hotspots in a more detailed way than the original WoS categories. Second, degree centrality was calculated to measure the number of relations between categories and keywords (see Popescu et al 2014). A node with high degree centrality has many connections in the network and connects papers with similar ideas or approaches.…”