The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States

Natura 2000, which is the core pillar of the European Union's biodiversity conservation policy, is an ambitious and complex venture that requires funding to be successful. A major challenge is said to be a lack of available funding, and a low uptake of allocated funds is also reported. However, in i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Geitzenauer, M., Blondet, M., Koning, J. de, Ferranti, F., Sotirov, M., Weiss, G., Winkel, G.
Format: Journal Article
Language:Inglés
Published: Elsevier 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/83178
_version_ 1855520720548790272
author Geitzenauer, M.
Blondet, M.
Koning, J. de
Ferranti, F.
Sotirov, M.
Weiss, G.
Winkel, G.
author_browse Blondet, M.
Ferranti, F.
Geitzenauer, M.
Koning, J. de
Sotirov, M.
Weiss, G.
Winkel, G.
author_facet Geitzenauer, M.
Blondet, M.
Koning, J. de
Ferranti, F.
Sotirov, M.
Weiss, G.
Winkel, G.
author_sort Geitzenauer, M.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Natura 2000, which is the core pillar of the European Union's biodiversity conservation policy, is an ambitious and complex venture that requires funding to be successful. A major challenge is said to be a lack of available funding, and a low uptake of allocated funds is also reported. However, in in-depth analysis has still not been produced to assess the approaches to funding, the reasons for these approaches and their impact regarding the achievement of the aims of Natura 2000. Thus, with this article, we intend to fill this gap. To accomplish this, a case study analysis was carried out in six selected EU Member States: Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK. In our study, we perceived different approaches which we sum up to two main types of approaches that were present in the Member States to different degrees. The first type was to find the funding necessary for the required activities, and the second was to delay the implementation of Natura 2000. The major reasons for the different approaches were related to domestic political power realities. The funding approaches impacted onto the attractiveness of EU co-financing instruments, and the sustainability of the schemes. Alternative approaches were either absent or declining in importance. The economic benefits were not perceived on the ground. We conclude that neither a “one size fits all” approach to funding Natura 2000 will work nor will a universal claim for “more money”. Therefore, a successful funding strategy ultimately necessitates effective interventions at institutional levels, the business environment and the local level.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace83178
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2017
publishDateRange 2017
publishDateSort 2017
publisher Elsevier
publisherStr Elsevier
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace831782024-05-01T08:16:21Z The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States Geitzenauer, M. Blondet, M. Koning, J. de Ferranti, F. Sotirov, M. Weiss, G. Winkel, G. nature conservation european union financing policy implementation forestry policies Natura 2000, which is the core pillar of the European Union's biodiversity conservation policy, is an ambitious and complex venture that requires funding to be successful. A major challenge is said to be a lack of available funding, and a low uptake of allocated funds is also reported. However, in in-depth analysis has still not been produced to assess the approaches to funding, the reasons for these approaches and their impact regarding the achievement of the aims of Natura 2000. Thus, with this article, we intend to fill this gap. To accomplish this, a case study analysis was carried out in six selected EU Member States: Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK. In our study, we perceived different approaches which we sum up to two main types of approaches that were present in the Member States to different degrees. The first type was to find the funding necessary for the required activities, and the second was to delay the implementation of Natura 2000. The major reasons for the different approaches were related to domestic political power realities. The funding approaches impacted onto the attractiveness of EU co-financing instruments, and the sustainability of the schemes. Alternative approaches were either absent or declining in importance. The economic benefits were not perceived on the ground. We conclude that neither a “one size fits all” approach to funding Natura 2000 will work nor will a universal claim for “more money”. Therefore, a successful funding strategy ultimately necessitates effective interventions at institutional levels, the business environment and the local level. 2017-09 2017-08-22T10:42:14Z 2017-08-22T10:42:14Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/83178 en Limited Access Elsevier Geitzenauer, M., Blondet, M., de Koning, J., Ferranti, F., Sotirov, M., Weiss, G. & Winkel, G. (2017). The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000–Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States. Forest Policy and Economics, 82, 3-13.
spellingShingle nature conservation
european union
financing
policy implementation
forestry policies
Geitzenauer, M.
Blondet, M.
Koning, J. de
Ferranti, F.
Sotirov, M.
Weiss, G.
Winkel, G.
The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title_full The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title_fullStr The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title_full_unstemmed The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title_short The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000 – Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States
title_sort challenge of financing the implementation of natura 2000 empirical evidence from six european union member states
topic nature conservation
european union
financing
policy implementation
forestry policies
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/83178
work_keys_str_mv AT geitzenauerm thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT blondetm thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT koningjde thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT ferrantif thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT sotirovm thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT weissg thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT winkelg thechallengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT geitzenauerm challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT blondetm challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT koningjde challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT ferrantif challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT sotirovm challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT weissg challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates
AT winkelg challengeoffinancingtheimplementationofnatura2000empiricalevidencefromsixeuropeanunionmemberstates