呼吁为监测和登记Natura 2000物种数据制定新的标准。

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Meritxell Genovart, Roberto Salguero-Gomez, Fernando Colchero, Francisco Guil, Joan Rabassa-Juvanteny, Julia Uriach-Dasca, Dalia Amor Conde, Jean Michel Gaillard, Tim Coulson
{"title":"呼吁为监测和登记Natura 2000物种数据制定新的标准。","authors":"Meritxell Genovart, Roberto Salguero-Gomez, Fernando Colchero, Francisco Guil, Joan Rabassa-Juvanteny, Julia Uriach-Dasca, Dalia Amor Conde, Jean Michel Gaillard, Tim Coulson","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives are intended to guarantee the persistence of species and natural habitats across member states. To achieve this laudable aim, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas was established in 1992. Since then, member states are required to regularly monitor species and habitats and report findings to the European Commission, which requires substantial investment from all countries. The Natura 2000 network is an invaluable example of a large-scale coordinated network developed to address major conservation issues. Based on our analysis of the 2020 Species Natura 2000 database and on expert opinions by Natura 2000 executives, we found that the network is failing to adequately show biodiversity status and guide conservation because it does not allow cross-border comparisons of species' and populations' conservation status. The main contributing factor to this failure is that member states frequently fail to follow reporting EU guidelines, resulting in heterogeneity in criteria for monitoring and registering species among Natura 2000 areas. We advocate developing new unified and realistic criteria for monitoring and reporting species data that correctly allow cross-border comparisons and conservation diagnosis. We propose that monitoring protocols and current criteria be modified slightly by considering species' life-history strategies, distribution, and conservation status. We do not suggest a major overhaul of the directives; rather, we propose debate on how relatively small changes in guidelines could improve the utility of the huge amount of data collected from the Natura 2000 network.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70064"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Call for new criteria for monitoring and registering Natura 2000 species data.\",\"authors\":\"Meritxell Genovart, Roberto Salguero-Gomez, Fernando Colchero, Francisco Guil, Joan Rabassa-Juvanteny, Julia Uriach-Dasca, Dalia Amor Conde, Jean Michel Gaillard, Tim Coulson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cobi.70064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives are intended to guarantee the persistence of species and natural habitats across member states. To achieve this laudable aim, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas was established in 1992. Since then, member states are required to regularly monitor species and habitats and report findings to the European Commission, which requires substantial investment from all countries. The Natura 2000 network is an invaluable example of a large-scale coordinated network developed to address major conservation issues. Based on our analysis of the 2020 Species Natura 2000 database and on expert opinions by Natura 2000 executives, we found that the network is failing to adequately show biodiversity status and guide conservation because it does not allow cross-border comparisons of species' and populations' conservation status. The main contributing factor to this failure is that member states frequently fail to follow reporting EU guidelines, resulting in heterogeneity in criteria for monitoring and registering species among Natura 2000 areas. We advocate developing new unified and realistic criteria for monitoring and reporting species data that correctly allow cross-border comparisons and conservation diagnosis. We propose that monitoring protocols and current criteria be modified slightly by considering species' life-history strategies, distribution, and conservation status. We do not suggest a major overhaul of the directives; rather, we propose debate on how relatively small changes in guidelines could improve the utility of the huge amount of data collected from the Natura 2000 network.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e70064\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70064\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70064","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧盟的鸟类和栖息地指令旨在保证物种和自然栖息地在成员国之间的持久性。为了实现这一值得称赞的目标,1992年建立了自然2000保护区网络。从那时起,成员国被要求定期监测物种和栖息地,并向欧盟委员会报告调查结果,这需要所有国家的大量投资。“自然2000”网络是为解决重大自然保护问题而建立的大规模协调网络的宝贵范例。基于我们对2020年物种自然2000数据库的分析和自然2000管理人员的专家意见,我们发现该网络无法充分显示生物多样性状况并指导保护,因为它不允许跨界比较物种和种群的保护状况。造成这种失败的主要原因是成员国经常不遵守欧盟的报告准则,导致在Natura 2000地区监测和登记物种的标准存在差异。我们提倡为监测和报告物种数据制定新的统一和现实的标准,以正确地进行跨界比较和保护诊断。我们建议通过考虑物种的生活史策略、分布和保护状况,对监测方案和现行标准进行轻微修改。我们并不建议对指令进行重大修改;相反,我们建议讨论指南中相对较小的变化如何提高从Natura 2000网络收集的大量数据的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Call for new criteria for monitoring and registering Natura 2000 species data.

The European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives are intended to guarantee the persistence of species and natural habitats across member states. To achieve this laudable aim, the Natura 2000 network of protected areas was established in 1992. Since then, member states are required to regularly monitor species and habitats and report findings to the European Commission, which requires substantial investment from all countries. The Natura 2000 network is an invaluable example of a large-scale coordinated network developed to address major conservation issues. Based on our analysis of the 2020 Species Natura 2000 database and on expert opinions by Natura 2000 executives, we found that the network is failing to adequately show biodiversity status and guide conservation because it does not allow cross-border comparisons of species' and populations' conservation status. The main contributing factor to this failure is that member states frequently fail to follow reporting EU guidelines, resulting in heterogeneity in criteria for monitoring and registering species among Natura 2000 areas. We advocate developing new unified and realistic criteria for monitoring and reporting species data that correctly allow cross-border comparisons and conservation diagnosis. We propose that monitoring protocols and current criteria be modified slightly by considering species' life-history strategies, distribution, and conservation status. We do not suggest a major overhaul of the directives; rather, we propose debate on how relatively small changes in guidelines could improve the utility of the huge amount of data collected from the Natura 2000 network.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信