The

basi

sfo

r susta

inability

inth

efa

ceof

gl

obal change

BIO

DIVERSITY

INSP

AIN

The eighth OSE thematic report examines the status and trends of biodiversity in Spain, considering theincreasing importance of biodiversity as a basis for sustainability in the face of global change. The reportalso describes the main causes of the loss of biodiversity in this country and proposes a number ofresponse mechanisms necessary for its conservation and sustainable use.

The declaration of 2010 as International Biodiversity Year has highlighted the importance of conservationand sustainable use of biodiversity for present and future societies. In the coming years, protecting itwill become an essential matter for the survival of humanity, so that investing in our natural capital willmean long-term savings, reinforcing the positive feedback between biodiversity, ecosystems servicesand human welfare.

Spain is the country with the greatest biological wealth on the European continent and, just like the restof the world, it is suffering a pronounced loss of biodiversity. The report stresses the need to strengthenthe response mechanisms so that the conservation of biodiversity stimulates sustainability processes,with special emphasis on better planning and management taking into account climate change and thetransformations of the territory, and an appropriate valuation of the natural heritage with a view to raisingawareness of the fact that our prosperity (and the indicators that measure it, over and above GDP)depends on bringing out the value of ecosystem services as an essential part of a new model of sustainabledevelopment.

This report is a source of verified and reliable information the purpose of which is to inform society andhelp those responsible for decision-making to define sustainable development policies and strategiesfirmly grounded in the sustainable use of the heritage wealth that is biodiversity.

BIO

DIV

ER

SITY

IN S

PA

INB

ase

de la

sos

teni

bilid

ad a

nte

el c

ambi

o gl

obal

GEN

ERAL

SUMMARY

EDITED BY:

© Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad en EspañaUniversidad de AlcaláPlaza de San Diego, s/n28801 Alcalá de Henares, Madridwww.sostenibilidad-es.org

© Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio AmbientePaseo de la Infanta Isabel, 128014 Madridwww.magrama.gob.es

© Fundación BiodiversidadCalle Fortuny, 728010 Madridwww.fundacion-biodiversidad.es

© Fundación General de la Universidad de AlcaláCalle Imagen, 1-328801 Alcalá de Henares, Madridwww.fgua.es

NIPO: 280-12-103-4

DESIGN: www.rincondelingenio.com

BIODIVERSITY IN SPAIN.THE BASIS FOR SUSTAINABILITY IN THE FACE OF GLOBAL CHANGE

GENERAL SUMMARY

MADRID 2012

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

5

AUTHORS

DirectorJiménez Herrero, Luis M.

CoordinationÁlvarez-Uría Tejero, PilarDe la Cruz Leiva, José Luis

AdvisorsFernández-Galiano, EladioJiménez Beltrán, DomingoLobo, JorgeZavala Gironés, Miguel Angel de

OSE authorsÁlvarez-Uría Tejero, PilarAyuso Álvarez, Ana MªDe la Cruz Leiva, José LuisGuaita García, NoeliaJiménez Herrero, Luis M.Landa Ortíz de Zárate, LucíaLópez Fernández, IsidroMorán Barroso, Alberto

MapsBasagaña Torrentó, JoanDe Carvalho Cantergiani, CarolinaDel Val Andrés, VictorRuiz Benito, Paloma

Authors-collaboratorsAlía, Ricardo (INIA) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Alvarez, Georgina (MARM) - Cap. 4 (4.3)Alvarez-Cobelas, Miguel (Instituto de Recursos Naturales,CSIC) - Cap. 4 (4.5)Anadón, Ricardo (Universidad de Oviedo) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Aragón, Pedro (MNCN, CSIC) - Cap. 4 (4.7)Auñón, Francisco Javier (INIA) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Barragán, Juan Manuel (Universidad de Cádiz) - Cap. 5 (5.7)Benayas, Javier (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) - Cap. 5 (5.10)Benito, Marta (INIA) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Calvete, Zaida (Fundación Biodiversidad) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Capdevila-Argüelles, Laura (Grupo Especialista en InvasionesBiológicas, GEIB) - Cap. 3 (3.4)Calzada, Javier (Universidad de Huelva) - Cap. 5 (5.2)Chica, Juan Adolfo (Universidad de Cádiz) - Cap. 5 (5.7)Esteve, Miguel Ángel (Observatorio de Sostenibilidad en laRegión de Murcia) - Cap. 3 (3.2)Fernández, Consolación (Universidad de Oviedo) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Fernández, Cristina (Cap. 4, University of California SantaCruz) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Fernánez-Arroyo, Rosa (Asociación RedMontañas) - Cap. 4 (4.4)

Fitz, H Carl (University of Florida) - Cap. 3 (3.2)García, Raúl (CSIC - INIA) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Gómez, Lorena (IRNAS-CSIC) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Gutiérrez, Víctor (Fundación Biodiversidad) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Jiménez, Amanda (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) - Cap. 5 (5.10)Lobo, Jorge M. (MNCN, CSIC) - Caps. 1 (1.3), 4 (4.7) y 5 (5.1, 5.4, 5.5 y 5.10)López, Carlos Tomás (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) -Cap. 3 (3.2)Losada, Iñigo (Universidad de Cantabria) - Cap. 3 (3.3)Martín de Agar, Pilar (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) -Cap. 3 (3.2)Martín, Berta (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) -Caps. 5 (5.10) y 6Martínez-Fernández Julia (Observatorio de Sostenibilidad enla Región de Murcia) - Cap. 3 (3.2)Mateo, Rubén G. (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha) - Cap. 3 (3.5)Montes, Carlos (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) - Cap. 6Moreno, José Manuel (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha) -Cap. 3 (3.5)Muñoz, María (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) - Cap. 5 (5.10)Ojea, Elena (Basque Centre for Climate Change - BC3) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Ortiz, Mercedes (Universidad de Alicante) - Cap. 5 (5.6)Peña, David (Fundación Biodiversidad) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Pérez, Mª Luisa (Universidad de Cádiz) - Cap. 5 (5.7)Purves, Drew (Microsoft Research) - Cap. 4 (4.2)Rodríguez-Urbieta,Itziar (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha) -Cap. 3 (3.5)Rojo, Carmen (Universidad de Valencia) - Cap. 4 (4.5)Roldán, María José (Centro de Investigaciones Ambientales,Comunidad de Madrid) - Cap. 3 (3.2)Román, Jacinto (Estación Biológica de Doñana, CSIC) - Cap. 5 (5.2)Ruiz, Paloma (INIA - Universidad de Alcalá; AP2008-01325) -Caps. 4 (4.2) y 5 (5.3)Sánchez, David (MNCN-CSIC) - Cap. 4 (4.7)Suárez, Víctor Ángel (Grupo Especialista en InvasionesBiológicas, GEIB) - Cap. 3 (3.4)Tellería, José Luis (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) -Cap. 3 (3.2)Torres, Ignacio (Fundación Biodiversidad) - Cap. 4 (4.6)Yuste, Carmen S. (Universidad de Huelva) - Cap. 5 (5.2)Zavala, Gonzalo (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha) - Cap. 3 (3.5)Zavala, Miguel Ángel de (Universidad de Alcalá - INIA) - Caps. 4 (4.2) y 5 (5.3)Zilletti, Bernardo (Grupo Especialista en InvasionesBiológicas, GEIB) - Cap. 3 (3.4)

Authors

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

6

AUTHORS

PicturesAlvarez-Uría, PilarCalvo, José FranciscoCarreño, María FranciscaCueto, JuanGarcía, AlbertoGarcía, MarioGonzález, CarlosGonzález, Manuel AntonioHernández, Juan ManuelMartínez, JavierMartínez-Fernández, JuliaMateo, Rubén G.Merino, NiloMuseo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC)OCÉANASECACSuárez, Carlos

IllustrationsThe illustrations are engravings of the 18th and the 19th

centuries and have been provided by Manuel Álvarez-Uría.

AcknowledgementsAboal, Marina (Universidad de Murcia)Araujo, Rafael (MNCN-CSIC)Armengol, Joan (Universidad de Barcelona)Arroyo, Juan (Universidad de Sevilla)Brotons, Lluís (Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya)Camacho, Antonio (Universidad de Valencia)Cirujano, Santos (Real Jardín Botánico-CSIC)De Luis, Estanislao (Universidad de León)Díaz, Mario (Instituto de Recursos Naturales, CSIC)Díaz, Tomás E. (Universidad de Oviedo)Doadrio, Ignacio (MNCN, CSIC)Durán, Juan José (IGME)García, Marta (MARM)Gallardo, Tomás (Universidad Complutense de Madrid)Global NatureGómez, Ricardo (MARM)Gutiérrez, David (URJC)Hortal, Joaquín (MNCN, CSIC)Oromi, Pedro (Universidad de la Laguna)Prat, Narcís (Universidad de Barcelona)Red Española del Pacto Mundial de Naciones UnidasRodríguez, Miguel Ángel (Universidad de Alcalá)Ruiz, Blanca (MARM)SEO/BirdLifeSerrano, Daniel (MARM)Soriano, Óscar (MNCN-CSIC)Stefanescu, Constantí (Museu Granollers-Ciències Naturals)Uribe, Francesc (MNCB)Valladares, Fernando (Instituto de Recursos Naturales, CSIC)Vidal, Charo (Universidad de Murcia)

Scientific ComiteeGómez Sal, Antonio (Presidente)Azqueta Oyarzun, DiegoBono Martínez, EmeritBosque Sendra, JoaquínDíaz Pineda, FranciscoFernández-Galiano, EladioGonzález Alonso, SantiagoJustel Eusebio, AnaNaredo Pérez, José ManuelPérez Arriaga, IgnacioPrat i Fornells, NarcísRiechmann Fernández, Jorge

Edition managerCheca Rodríguez, Almudena

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

7

PREAMBLEJOAQUÍN ARAÚJO

Delaying as long as possible transferring one’s own energy, or that contained in any organism of any species, is a basiclife skill. Something like your body really being all yours and as little as possible of something foreign to you. Livingconsists, among many other facets, in ensuring that neither time, nor the other are left with the animated matter thatmakes you part of the Biosphere. We are all forced, in any case, into a myriad of exchanges with the many other com-ponents of the vital systems and essential elements. In this latter sense, the affectionate friendship between the inani-mate and the palpitating is no small thing. I am referring to the fact that air, sun, water and rock, while not alive them-selves, are an essential support of life.

Living is, among many other relations, incessantly searching for what is different from you in order to incorporate itsfuel and matter into yours. We are because of what we are not. But that very feature also becomes an identity, our inti-mate reality, for the simple reason that we are also what we breathe, drink and eat.

Which, translated into what we want to forget, consists in keeping yourself alive in the midst of life: that is what livingconsists in. And it is no tautology or redundancy, if we want to be demanding of ourselves when trying to encompasswhat encompasses us.

Let us recall, from these first paragraphs, that liveliness encompasses all of us, the many, millions of species from thefive kingdoms of life; but no less all the scenarios in which each and every one of those organisms and the associationsand communities they form deploy themselves; but no less the processes by which cycles are possible; but no less theessential elements that those same cycles turn round; but no less the fuel that, directly or indirectly, feeds species, lands-capes, advances and returns, in other words, solar energy. Liveliness, indeed, cannot be detached from what makes it pos-sible. It is enough not to forget what we are composed of to take on board the most striking approach to what we call bio-logical diversity. Every day we gently inject fourteen or fifteen kilos of air into the totality of the almost 30 billion cells ofwhich we are composed and which are themselves composed of the same as any other cell with a nucleus of the millionsof species that accompany us. In other words, which have been as they are since long before we were the way we are. Noless the fact that they cluster together, coordinate themselves, form infinite complexities.

As is forgotten, when not scorned, neither is it redundant, or a tautology, to recall that the model of economic relations –theonly one that exists- is based precisely on maintaining us, yes, but on the basis of robbing, upsetting, undermining and redu-cing everything that is alive. It produces not with, but against, liveliness. It is based, therefore, on destroying what we too are,by abducting –centripetally- nearly all the energy of the biosphere that has thus begun to run off the rails of the sphericaltrack of the cycles that get their supplies from those previously supplied by them. Out there, the consumed and the consu-mer are inseparable parts of their functioning. In here, we consume without paying attention to what is consumed.

Monopolising is not only cruel, it is unwise, because it is impoverishing. As this report shows, we depend in every way,including the most economic, material and selfish, on that capacity for renewal that also defines liveliness. Something

Joaquín Araújo Lively liveliness

“When part of the whole falls, the rest is not safe”Séneca

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

8

PREAMBLEJOAQUÍN ARAÚJO

as simple to understand and respect as how at least 40% of GDP is directly related to the planet’s vital multiplicity oughtto be enough for us to give something back in return. The astonishing thing is that such more than necessary reciprocitywould consist in something that is not at all demanding or laborious. It suffices not to do anything or to leave the naturalsystems alone for their benefits to reach us. Which would lead us to the conclusion that little or nothing is more produc-tive, even economically, than leaving landscapes as they are or were, rather than humiliating them.

However, everywhere there appears the great stumbling block. The norm is to reject reciprocity, giving back some-thing in exchange for what one has received. What happens then has the attributes of the grand tragedy that comesfrom moving out of the cycles for the stupid straight line of appropriation -not to say plunder- to prevail.

Which at the moment we face with the present weakness of the emotions and the heightened betrayal of scientific kno-wledge. Let us now set out some instances of such knowledge. Of course, no more than a brief introduction to themany and excellently compelling examples that give substance to this new endeavour by OSE.

Let us remember that only by following itself has life succeeded in reaching us. As there is proof of such perseverancefor at least 3,500 million years it is plain that eternity has already been. Therefore it has had more than enough time tocram this planet with fascinating multiplicity. Liveliness – a word, let us not forget, that evokes strength, health, speed,brilliance and even beauty- is what has been responsible for the fact that here at least some 500 million different solu-tions -aspects- have been possible for the materialisation of life in as many forms. Of these, around 100 million speciesmay be left, at least 80,000 in our territory. Therefore, the number of neighbours we have right now is still almost incal-culable, as shown by the many figures that are bandied about in this regard. But none of them puts a low figure –ratherjust the opposite- on the living beings currently populating this world or Spain. Nor should we rule out that each of them,ie each species, incorporates, in some way, if not all, then at least a good part, of the major events of the four-times-a-thousand-million-year-history of life. We all carry the whole history of life in our bodies. We have inside us nothing lessthan a long, prodigious process, full of links, dependencies and liberations, but always with an irreplaceable –becauseunique- fellow-traveller: this planet. A tiny, fragile corner of the Universe that also seems to derive enjoyment from itsinfinite aspects; the variety of its landscapes; the essential role of the differences that complete the complexity.

Hence it follows that life and its environment are one and the same necessity: for us and for them. Hence it followsthat one out of the millions of possible definitions of liveliness is that it is a network of protection and care. It wouldtherefore make sense to look after what looks after us.

However, as though it were bleeding to death through an invisible wound, the planet’s vast flow of vital multiplicity iswaning. Every day it loses dozens, hundreds, perhaps more than a thousand of its creatures. The irreversible tragedy can-not be quantified precisely, since we are not sure either of the number of species with which we share our surroundings,needs and origin. And also our future. Therefore, there is little or nothing as progressive as conserving the planet’s liveli-ness. Which we ought to fecundate with an emphatic change in behaviour. Because a complete turnabout is called for.

We can turn the absurd cruelty of this shrinking of multiplicity into friendliness towards what is different. Which, in addi-tion to making good sense –by being essential and productive- would be ethical and calming. Seeing to it that the diversityof life does not diminish, is not only a moral obligation, but also acquires a high degree of rationality. Biodiversity is themost renewable of raw materials for a large part of human needs, including all that are absolutely indispensable.

To which must be added the fact that there are as many reasons to halt extinction as there are species remaining. But no lessby the path of sensible modesty. The kind that requires also what we know today. And we know that nothing can replace it.

What makes liveliness so lively is that we cannot create it with the complexity attained. Actually, even with having it so closeand in such profusion, we hardly succeed in defining it, much less in understanding it. The wise thing to do when somethinglike that happens and, what is more, you need it, is at least to admire it and defend it, which boils down to the same thing.Something we need to tackle simply because liveliness needs it. Something that hardly takes any effort, as it is enough not todo anything for liveliness to work incessantly in favour of its creations. However, too often we succeed in becoming lonelier andlonelier every day. We are the only living being that increases nothingness. That enhances the fatal ugliness of an increasinglyempty world. All of which is happening when there is a possibility not just of co-existence, but of the recognition that if the wholeof life accompanies us, beauty and the real potential of a fairer and more durable human development will be maintained.

Variety is the truth of this world. And its beauty.

Thank you and may life please you.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

9

PREAMBLEMIGUEL DELIBES DE CASTRO

The definition of biodiversity I prefer is not properly speaking a definition, and it comes from David Takacs. Accordingto him, when naturalists mention the word biodiversity they are referring at the same time to the elements that makeup the living world, the relations among these elements, the ecological processes that enable them to exist, the evo-lutionary processes that explain their origin and, as if all that were not enough, also the importance of their conser-vation and our ignorance about all this.

The elements or structures that make up the living world encompass an unimaginable range of scales. At the finestlevel, there are the genes, the foundation of all hereditary variation. If at first genetics remained rather outside theconcern for nature conservation, today it is considered an essential part of it. The reason for this lies, on the one hand,in the demographic deterioration of populations which can result from the loss of genetic variation and, on the other,in recognition of the importance of the genetic riches of populations and species in ensuring both their rational useand their potential for adaptation and evolution. Although taking stock of the situation and tracking diversity trends atthe genetic level is an immense undertaking, this is already being done with many economically important varieties ofplants and animals, and also with some endangered species.

On a coarser scale, populations and species are elements of the living world. We do not know how many species thereare, still less how many populations, but we do know they disappear at a speed –known as the “background extinctionrate”, ie the rate at which species would be extinguished naturally and replaced by others- between a hundred and tenthousand times faster than is desirable or normal. As at first sight it is easier to make an inventory of species than anyother element, some authors equate the concept of biodiversity with that of species richness. However, I regard thefact that the authors and publishers of this report have avoided such reductionism as a good decision.

Because, obviously, ecosystems are also elements of the living world, and they must be taken very carefully intoaccount. It is true that it is difficult to mark the limits between some ecosystems and others, and therefore to inven-tory them (for some people, the pond they are studying is an ecosystem, whereas for others all wetlands are an ecos-ystem; our skins, or our intestines, are true microbial ecosystems). That does not prevent us from accepting that thelogging of forests, the destruction of lagoons or, on another scale, the possible disappearance of the polar ecosystemsas we know them, represent an enormous loss of natural wealth.

But I have called the ecosystems elements when their name itself indicates that, like any other system, they have per-force a dynamic, relational character, as they include the processes that form them. We thus move onto the followingmeanings recognised by Takacs: biodiversity also encompasses the relations between the different elements and theprocesses generated by these relations. That is why this report is basically about ecosystems, whether they be forest,fresh water or marine ecosystems, without forgetting those shaped by humans, such as agrosystems.

Miguel Delibes de CastroDOÑANA BIOLOGICAL STATION (CSIC)

Biodiversity to change life

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

10

PREAMBLEMIGUEL DELIBES DE CASTRO

Ecosystems function in ecological time, as I have suggested, but they also vary in evolutionary time, and conservingtheir capacity to evolve is one of the goals that conservationists cannot fail to neglect, however far off it may appear.If the tiny and inconspicuous mammals that lived alongside the dinosaurs had become extinct, we would not have beenable to exist.

Being alive is taking resources from the environment and releasing waste into the environment. All living beings do itand by doing it we alter our surroundings. Thanks to the fact that microorganisms and plants photosynthesise, the-reby releasing oxygen as a waste product, we can all breathe. Mammals, and with them human beings, only appearedon Earth when they could, that is to say when living things had modified the biosphere in such a way that it had beco-me hospitable for them.

We give the name ecosystem goods and services to the goods and services with which living communities providehumanity free of charge, thereby making the Earth a friendly place for it. They are normally divided into four catego-ries related to four ecosystem functions: regulation, habitat, production and information services.

The regulatory functions maintain the essential ecological processes and the systems that support life, from the com-position of gases in the atmosphere that modulates the climate to crop pollination. Habitat functions refer to the shel-ter and reproduction environment ecosystems provide for wild flora and fauna, thereby contributing to the conserva-tion of genetic diversity and evolutionary processes. The production functions are more easily perceived, as they haveto do with natural goods that we directly or indirectly exploit (all, in turn, dependent on the capacity of the so-calledprimary producers to convert carbon dioxide, water and a few nutrients into living matter). The information functions,which are harder to grasp, refer to the opportunities living beings offer for knowledge, enjoyment, culture, etc.

By way of a metaphor, populations and species are commonly likened to the nuts and bolts of the complicated “bios-phere machinery” which supplies us with those indispensable free goods and services, We can lose a few pieceswithout the functioning of System Earth being unduly affected; but how many? The most prudent course of action is toconserve as many as possible (what we call the “precautionary principle”).

Precisely because in order to live we humans need a well-conserved nature, the last two meanings I mentioned at thebeginning should be linked to the term biodiversity. It must be a mobilising word that generates a concern for conser-vation and a desire for changes in our lifestyle. The idea of biodiversity can and must make us different. Likewise, itought to push us into more research: we depend on a reality of which we are for the most part ignorant, and this refersto both its components and, particularly, how it functions.

A few years ago the World Conservation Monitoring Center was able to say that the word biodiversity had become aloose synonym of all “life on Earth”, a value we must preserve. The report you have in your hands brings us up to datewith the status of biodiversity -the whole of life- in Spain. It helps us to know more, to be glad in some cases and con-cerned in many others. But, above all its other qualities, which are by no means few, its main virtue is that it can helpus to change our society, making it gradually more environmentally respectful and friendly. We need this.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

11

PRESENTATIONLUIS M. JIMÉNEZ HERRERO

A year for biodiversity. A key issue for global sustainability

In this International Year of Biodiversity, OSE presents a new thematic report, on the status and trends of biodiversityin Spain, as it regards this biological wealth as the fundamental basis for sustainability in the face of the phenomenonof global change.

OSE has been covering extremely important sustainability issues in its thematic reports since 2006, when we publis-hed the first of them on Changes in Land Use in Spain: Implications for Sustainability. This was followed by otherreports such as Air Quality in the Cities. Keys for Urban Sustainability (2007); Water and Sustainability. Water BasinFunctionality (2008); Local Sustainability: An Urban and Rural Approach (2009); The Natural, Cultural and LandscapeHeritage. Keys for Territorial Sustainability (2009): and Global Change in Spain 2020/50 (2010) (in collaboration with theGeneral Foundation of the Complutense University of Madrid (FGUCM) and the National Environment Congress(CONAMA) Foundation), and Green Employment in a Sustainable Economy (2010) (in collaboration with the BiodiversityFoundation).

This report follows the same methodological approach adopted by OSE since it began, based on the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model. In the particular case of biodiversity, this methodological approach is extre-mely suited to an analysis of the interrelations between socioeconomic dynamics and the impacts on natural capitaland biodiversity that affect the sustainability of our style of development. This is precisely how the report is structu-red. First, it provides an analysis of the driving forces exerting pressure on natural resources. Second, it describes thestatus and trends of ecosystems and species before going on to examine the different social response mechanisms(planning, management, sectoral integration, knowledge, economic valuation and the use of economic instruments)that can be activated to correct the negative trends detected and reduce the country’s vulnerability risks.

This is a coherent analysis methodology for homing in on the challenges and finding solutions and new opportunities.Biodiversity loss in Spain is in line with the worrying global trends due to a set of factors that are continually accele-rating and intensifying in a context of global change affecting the entire planet and revealing an evident collective fai-lure. If these trends continue, we shall be getting nearer points of no return -as is also happening with climate chan-ge- that will reduce the capacity of ecosystems to provide the goods and services that are essential for human welfa-re, such as food, fresh water, raw materials, medicines and leisure spaces, as well as important cultural assets andspiritual benefits.

Luis M. Jiménez HerreroExecutive Director of the Observatory on Sustainability in Spain

Most of the negative effects on the state of biodiversity are driven by the growing use of natural resources to satisfythe production and consumption patterns of certain development models that have clearly shown themselves to beunsustainable. Improving the results of the efforts to conserve, restore and make sustainable use of biodiversity willrequire changes in our lifestyle and in business development strategies. That is why there is an ever more urgent needfor integrated management of socioeconomic activities and of natural wealth, territory, water, air and living resourcesthat will lead to their being used rationally and fairly. Spatial development, resource valuation and accounting, andconsistency among sectoral policies at all levels can help to find a balance between the need to preserve natural capi-tal and the need to use it rationally in order to bring out new opportunities and foster sustainable development.

But it is also necessary to adopt a more biocentric view (as opposed to the dominant anthropocentric view) in order toaccept that people, with their material, cultural and social needs, are an integral part of ecosystems and that newrights for the living beings that share a common destiny with human beings in the biosphere must be recognised.

Our integrated vision of sustainability and ecosystem relations in the face of global change

Our vision of biodiversity from a sustainability perspective and in the reference framework of sustainable developmentseeks to stress the interconnections among species (including people), their habitats and the services they provide ingeneral and for human beings in particular. The analysis of both the state and trends in changing future scenarios,and the measures adopted, must be based on a more holistic approach that recognises these interdependencies anduses political, social, economic and institutional instruments to ensure the integrity of ecosystems and maintain a sus-tainable flow of ecosystem services.

The complex relations between biological diversity and climate change are part of the interrelated dynamics of globalchange which, in Spain’s case, takes on special importance. This country is one of the most vulnerable to climatechange in Europe and the Mediterranean, which has major negative repercussions on basic sectors of the Spanisheconomy such as forestry, agriculture and tourism. On the other hand, it is the country with the biggest biologicalwealth on the European continent, but there is a growing loss of biodiversity, which means that one of the main assetsof our valuable natural and territorial capital is under threat. At the same time, desertification is seriously affectingthe mainland and the islands to the extent that 37% of the country’s surface area is at a high, or very high, risk ofdesertification, which has a significant environmental and economic impact.

All this increases the unsustainability risks of our development model, not only because of the loss of the ecosystems’productive potential with its knock-on effect on dependent socioeconomic systems, but also because many of the inte-rrelated processes, such as fire-related erosion, together with other human activities linked to the artificialisation ofthe territory, for example, are causing big losses of the endogenous capacities of the territory’s natural capital andheritage values with highly irreversible effects.

Growing threats to biodiversity and some signs of hope

At the present time alterations to Spain’s biological systems are already occurring as a consequence of climate chan-ge. Moreover, the distribution and abundance of organisms is going to change substantially, so management measu-res must no doubt be aimed at adaptation to the new environmental conditions of the future.

On the other hand, the pressures on biodiversity due to human activities are on the rise. In the last 20 years, the extentof artificial areas has doubled, in large part at the expense of natural areas and environmentally active agrarian areas,with the consequent loss of biodiversity. Indeed, the natural landscapes in Spain occupied by endangered species havesuffered the same degree of modification by humans as the rest of the territory and, according to predictive models,if the present trends is maintained, artificial surfaces could greatly increase in unprotected areas, thereby having aneven more negative effect on the territory’s ecological connectivity.

There still exist shortcomings in the development and implementation of action plans for the conservation of endan-gered species at the regional level; only 9.4% of the animal species with the worst conservation status are the objectof at least one action plan in their distribution area.

However, there exist in Spain sufficient important legal and strategic frameworks to inspire signs of hope at both theEuropean level, with the Biodiversity Action Plan and the Natura 2000 Network, and the national level, with the All-SpainNatural Heritage and Biodiversity Strategic Plan, and Law 42/2007 on Natural Heritage and Biodiversity, whose full deve-lopment and implementation is certainly fundamental for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

PRESENTATIONLUIS M. JIMÉNEZ HERRERO

12BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

Seeking co-evolution and resilience

In addition to tackling the reduction of negative impacts, it is necessary to ensure that ecosystems and human socie-ties co-evolve positively by putting in place mechanisms that have a greater capacity for recovery and greater resilien-ce to adapt to fluctuations and changes. Hence the importance of meeting the challenges posed by biological diversityand climate change in a coordinated manner and with an integrated approach.

There is a need for a more intelligent pact between humanity and life-sustaining systems, and to take immediate deci-sions to reduce biodiversity loss in favour of global sustainability. Otherwise, our ability to cope with possible negativeimpacts in the future may be substantially curtailed.

Biodiversity is a vital heritage that needs to be managed sustainably and protected so that it in turn will protect us andthe planet.

Our gratitude and our commitments

I would like to express once again my thanks and my sincerest congratulations to the researchers and technical staffof the OSE’s Technical Unit, and to the numerous collaborators from the university and professional world who haveparticipated in the production of this latest report. And, together with them, our gratitude to the institutions that werebehind the setting up of the OSE and have unconditionally supported us ever since, as well as the organisations com-mitted to sustainable development that work so efficiently with OSE so that we can all continue to build these inde-pendent scientific and technical capacities for assessing our progress towards the goal of sustainable development inSpain.

OSE intends to continue undertaking further thematic research into sustainability with an integrated approach, true toour mission of promoting social changes towards sustainability with the best information for decision-making andpublic participation in Spain.

PRESENTATIONLUIS M. JIMÉNEZ HERRERO

13 BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

OBJECT,METHOD ANDSTRUCTURE

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

17

OBJECT, METHOD AND STRUCTURE

The object of this, the eighth OSE thematic report, is toexamine the status and trends of biodiversity in Spain,considering the increasing importance of biodiversity asone of the main components of global change. Thereport also describes the principal causes of the loss ofbiodiversity in this country and proposes a number ofresponse mechanisms necessary for its conservationand sustainable use.

The declaration of 2010 as International BiodiversityYear highlighted the importance of the conservation andsustainable use of biodiversity for human well-being inthe present and the future. In the coming years, protec-

ting biodiversity will become an essential matter for thesurvival of humanity and investing in our natural capitalwill mean long-term savings.

There is therefore a need to acquire more accurate kno-wledge about everything to do with biodiversity in orderbetter to understand the links between biodiversity,ecosystem services and human well-being. This reportis a source of verified and reliable information the pur-pose of which is to help those responsible for decision-making to define sustainable development policies andstrategies firmly based on the heritage wealth that isbiodiversity.

1. Object

In preparing this report the Observatory onSustainability in Spain (OSE) has had recourse to thebest available information resources in collaborationwith public-sector bodies and prestigious Spanish andinternational research centres and universities.

The methodology employed was a cause-effect appro-ach based on the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model used by the EuropeanEnvironment Agency.

This model is a powerful tool for analysing the interre-lations between socioeconomic dynamics and the envi-ronmental impacts affecting biodiversity, and furnishesa view of environmental degradation that highlights thedirect and indirect causal factors by looking at the dri-ving forces that exert pressure on the environment andnatural and environmental resources by altering theirinitial state to a greater or lesser degree. Society canrespond to these impacts by trying to correct the nega-tive trends detected in order to maintain and improve

the structure and function of the ecosystems and theservices they provide.

It should be pointed out that at various points in thisreport predictive models are presented for the purposeof grasping how species and ecosystems are likely toevolve in the future in the face of global change. Thesemodels will also enable the development of biodiversityindicators that take into account the complex spatio-temporal relations among their different components.

2. Method

DRIVING FORCES

Endangered species action plansTerritory management inside and outside protected areasIdentification of priority conservation areasPlanning and management of the marine environmentIntegration in sectoral policiesCorporate actionsKnowledge, education and awareness-raisingEconomic valuation and economic management instruments

PRESSURES STATE IMPACT

PopulationEconomic growthTechnologyGlobalisation

Land use changesClimate changeInvasive speciesForest fires

Forest ecosystemsAgrarian ecosystemsMountain ecosystemsInland water ecosystemsMarine ecosystemsSpecies

Biodiversity lossHeritage lossEcosystem services lossClimate changeFood HealthNatural resources

RES

PO

NSE

S

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

18

OBJECT, METHOD AND STRUCTURE

Following the methodological approach adopted, thereport is divided into seven chapters, headed by a gene-ral summary that synthesises its most important con-tents.

Chapter 1 consists in a general introduction outliningthe importance of biodiversity for human beings, ofwhich they are a part, describing the present state ofbiodiversity loss at the global level before turning to bio-diversity in Spain.

Chapter 2 deals with the main reference frameworks forbiodiversity conservation at the global and Europeanlevels. It also describes the strategies and legal frame-work for biodiversity conservation in Spain and its auto-nomous communities.

Chapter 3 describes the main causes of biodiversity lossin Spain: land cover changes, climate change, invasivealien species and forest fires. Other major pressures,such as pollution and overexploitation, are not dealtwith specifically here, but are taken up in various sec-tions of the following chapter.

The status and trends of ecosystems and species inregard to the different factors of global change are des-cribed in Chapter 4, focusing first on the main ecos-ystems existing in Spain -forest, agrarian, mountain,inland water and marine- then on species. Geneticdiversity is not dealt with as such, although various sec-tions of this chapter examine specific aspects of it.

Chapter 5 explores the different response mechanismsin place and those that are necessary to counter thepressures on biodiversity stemming from global chan-ge. First, it looks at species conservation plans, puttingspecial emphasis on their degree to which they havebeen implemented in the different autonomous com-munities. Second, it examines the influence of landcover changes and climate change on the protectionfunctions of the PNSs, and identifies the priority areasfor biodiversity conservation. This chapter also dealswith marine environment planning and integratedmanagement of coastal areas as conservation mecha-nisms for marine and coastal ecosystems, and tacklesa key question: knowledge, awareness raising and edu-cation about biodiversity. It then describes corporateinitiatives promoting biodiversity conservation and eco-nomic valuation of biodiversity as a tool to stem biodi-versity loss. Lastly, it explores payment for environmen-tal services and stewardship of the territory as twoessential means of integrating environmental conside-rations into economic activities.

Since the flow of ecosystem goods and services requi-res more detailed treatment going beyond an operatio-nal approach for the purposes of an economic valuation,Chapter 6 offers a more wide-ranging analysis of therelations between socio-ecological systems and ecos-ystem services that specifically examines how humansaffect the integrity of ecosystems and how these affecthuman well-being. It describes the conceptual frame-work for assessing ecosystem services and analysesthe compromises or trade-offs, as, in many cases, theprovisioning and use of one service leads to the degra-dation of others.

Lastly, Chapter 7 puts forward ten priority actions forbiodiversity conservation in Spain as a proposal for thefuture.

3. Structure

GENERALSUMMARY

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

21

GENERAL SUMMARY

The loss of biodiversity is one of the main phenomenaassociated with the global change that is affectinghuman well-being

Biodiversity is the variety of life on Earth at all levels.Human beings are part of biodiversity and benefit from it inmany ways. The fundamental goods and services withwhich biodiversity supplies human beings include suchbasic things as food, forest products, regulation of thenatural cycles and the capacity to adapt to climate change.

It also provides cultural, aesthetic and spiritual benefits,and, in addition, has an intrinsic value that must be adequa-tely taken into account in planning and managing the wayhumans benefit from biodiversity (Figure GS.1). Bearingthis in mind, it is advisable to be cautious about using theservices provided by ecosystems as an argument for theconservation of biodiversity, as what is required is a type ofmanagement aimed at maintaining a wide and balancedrange of services, including biodiversity’s intrinsic value,not one geared only to provisioning services.

General Summary

Figura GS.1. Biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services and human well-being.

Source: Adapted from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) (1).

Global changeClimate

Biogeochemical cycles

Land uses

Invasive alien species

BiodiversityNumberRelative abundanceCompositionInteractions

Ecosystemfunctions

Human well-beingBasic material for a good lifeHealthSafetyGood social relationsFreedom of choice and action

Ecosystem servicesProvisioning servicesFood, fibre and fuelGenetic resourcesBiochemicalsFresh waterCultural ServicesSpiritual and religious valuesKnowledge systemEducation and inspirationRecreation and aesthetic values

Supporting ServicesPrimary productionProvision of habitatNutrient cyclingSoil formation and retentionProduction of atmospheric oxygenWater cyclingRegulating ServicesInvasion resistanceHerbivoryPollinationSeed dispersalClimate regulationPest regulationDisease regulationNatural hazard protectionErosion regulationWater purification

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

22

GENERAL SUMMARY

Figura GS.2. The main biodiversity indicators at the global level.

Source: CBD (2010) (2).

100

80

60

40

20

0Living Planet Index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5Red List Index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Amphibians

Mammals

Birds Corals 41

40

39Forest area

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

150

130

110

90

70

50Wild Birds Index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Terrestrial

Wetlands3.5

3.0

2.5Marine Trophic Index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0

Marine meadows area

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Millions of squarekilometres

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0Wild Bird Index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

90

85

80

75

70Water quality index

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

50

40

30

20

10

0

Indian-Pacific

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Percentage of live coral

Caribbean

Status of the coral reefs

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0

Mangrove area

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Millions of squarekilometres

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

The main framework for international cooperation to conserve biological diversity is the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)which was established at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Río de Janeiro in 1992 andentered into force in December 1993.

The CBD has three main objectives:

· The conservation of biological diversity,· The sustainable use of its components and· The fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources

The Nagoya COP10

In October 2010 the most important Meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the CBD (the Nagoya COP 10) was held sincethe CBD was set up in 1992.Several agreements were reached at the meeting, including the adoption of a new ten-year Strategic Plan to guide national andinternational efforts to save biological diversity by intensifying action to reach the CBD’s targets, a resource mobilisation stra-tegy that provides the way forward to a substantial increase of official development assistance in support of biodiversity and anew international protocol on access to and sharing of the benefits from the use of the planet’s genetic resources..

The target agreed in 2002 of achieving a significantreduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss at theglobal, regional and national levels by 2010 has notbeen achieved

The state of biodiversity at the global level is gettingworse. This trend is confirmed by the assessment madeusing indicators of the population trends of endangeredspecies, the condition and size of habitats, the composi-tion of communities, etc. (Figure GS.2). At the same

time, the pressures on biodiversity are increasing, asshown by indicators of resource consumption, invasivealien species, nitrogen pollution, overexploitation andthe impacts of climate change. Everything, therefore,points to the fact that the rate of biodiversity loss isaccelerating, in spite of certain successes at the locallevel and an increase in response mechanisms, such aslarger protected areas, sustainable forest managementand measures taken in regard to invasive alien species.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

23

GENERAL SUMMARY

The rate of biodiversity loss has reached unpreceden-ted levels, which alters the functions of the ecos-ystems and makes them more vulnerable to disrup-tion, less able to recover and less able to providehuman beings with goods and services

It is important to bear in mind that that there is majorrisk of a drastic loss of biodiversity if ecosystems exce-ed certain thresholds or tipping points. All this entails ahigh cost for society, because of biodiversity’s intrinsicvalue and because of the loss of provisioning, regulatingand cultural services.

It is possible to delimit a “safe” operating space orboundary for human activities in order to maintain theintegrity and functioning of natural systems at the glo-bal level (3). The biodiversity loss boundary has alreadybeen crossed, as have the boundaries of change andhuman interference in the nitrogen cycle. Other compo-nents whose boundaries are close to being transgres-sed are freshwater use, changes in land use, ocean aci-dification and interference in the phosphorus cycle(Figure GS.3).

The main direct drivers of biodiversity loss are changes in land use, unsustainable use of naturalresources, pollution, climate change and invasivealien species

In addition to the causes of biodiversity loss alreadymentioned, there exist a number of underlying factorsthat are more difficult to control and are connected tosocial, economic and cultural trends influencing the

amount of resources utilised by humans (Figure GS.4).Demographic growth, consumption patterns, the volu-me of international trade, failures of governance, deci-sion-making and the working of the institutions, as wellas the deficiencies of the economy and the markets, areamong the indirect drivers of biodiversity loss. On theother hand, insufficient knowledge of the mechanismsthat determine the ecosystem functioning also contri-bute to the loss of biodiversity.

Figura GS.3. The safe operating space for environmentalchanges due to human activities (yellow) and an estimate ofthe current position (red).

Source: Rockström et al (2009) (3)

Climate change

Chemical

pollu

tion

(not

yet quantifie

d)

Atm

osph

eric

aero

sol

load

ing

(not

yet q

uant

ified

)Bio

dive

rsity

loss

inlanduse

Change Global

freshwateruse

Phosphorus

cycle

Nitrogen

cycle(biogeochem

ical

flowboundary)

ozonedepletion

Stratospheric

acidification

Ocean

Figura GS.4. Interconnections between people, biodiversity, ecosystem health and provision of ecosystem services.

Source: WWF (2010) (4).

Population Consumption Resourceefficiency

(technology)

Agriculture,forestry

Fishing,hunting

Urbanindustry,mining

Water Energy,transport

Supportingservices

Provisioningservices

Regulatingservices

Culturalservices

Habitatloss

Overexploitation Invasivespecies

Pollution Climatechange

Terrestrial Freshwater Marine

Causal factors Indirect Drivers / Footprint Sectors Pressures on Biodiversity State of Global Biodiversity Impacts on Ecological Services

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

24

GENERAL SUMMARY

CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY AT THE EUROPEAN LEVEL

The EU Sustainable Development Strategy includes sustainable management of natural resources and biodiversity as one ofits environmental priorities.

The Natura 2000 Network is the central plank of the EU’s nature and biodiversity policy. It consists in an extensive network ofprotected sites established under the Habitats Directive in 1992. Its main aim is to ensure that land management in future willbe both ecologically and economically sustainable, safeguarding the long-term survival of the most valuable and endangeredspecies and habitats in Europe. It comprises nearly 26,000 protected sites with a total surface area of more than 850,000 squa-re kilometres, which is approximately 18% of the EU’s land surface.

As a Contracting Party to the CDB, in 1998 the EU adopted the EC Biodiversity Strategy and later, in 2001, the CommunityBiodiversity Action Plan. The aim of the EC Biodiversity Strategy is to anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of significant bio-diversity reduction or loss. The four Biodiversity Action Plans (for the Conservation of Natural Resources, for Agriculture, forFishing and for Economic Cooperation and Development) detail which actions should be taken to implement the Strategy in spe-cific areas of the EC’s activity.

On May 3 2011, the European Commission adopted a new strategy to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in theEU by 2020, in line with two commitments made by EU leaders in March 2010 – “halting the loss of biodiversity and the degra-dation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contributionto averting global biodiversity loss"- and a vision for 2050: "by 2050, European Union biodiversity and the ecosystem services itprovides – its natural capital – are protected, valued and appropriately restored for biodiversity's intrinsic value and for theiressential contribution to human wellbeing and economic prosperity, and so that catastrophic changes caused by the loss of bio-diversity are avoided". The strategy is also in line with the global commitments made in Nagoya in October 2010, in the contextof the Convention on Biological Diversity, where world leaders adopted of a package of measures to address global biodiversityloss over the coming decade.

Spain is characterised by its high degree of biologicaldiversity, the highest on the European continent

Spain has the largest number of vertebrate species andvascular plants of all European countries. It is estima-ted that about 85,000 different species (more than halfof all European species) are present in Spain and thatapproximately 30% of the endemic species recognisedon the continent inhabit this country.

Some of the data on the evolution of the populations ofendangered fauna and the increasing number of spe-cies included in the National Catalogue of EndangeredSpecies (around 600 at the present time) are proof of theexistence of improved conservation strategies, but arealso evidence of the decline and increased risk ofextinction of some species.

For example, the proportion of endangered vertebratesaccording to the Red Books has risen by 5% in the pastfew years, from 26% in 1992 to 31% in 2007. This incre-

ased level of threat has not been met by effective pro-tection measures for most of these species, as, with theexception of terrestrial mammals, the proportion ofthreatened species that have been listed varies betwe-en 10% and 35%.

Habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation, the disap-pearance of traditional stock-farming and agriculturaluses, abusive fishing of marine species, uncontrolledurbanisation, infrastructure growth, soil degradation,the emission of pollutants into the environment and theexcessive use of water resources may be regarded asthe main factors jeopardising the medium- and long-term conservation of biodiversity in Spain. To these dan-gers generated by the absence of territorial planningtending towards sustainable use of natural resourcesand, in some cases, because of the failure to enforcecurrent legislation, are added global external factorssuch as climate change and the invasion of alien spe-cies, upon which local and regional socio-economicpolicies have a limited effect.

BIODIVERSITY IN SPAIN: IMPLICATIONS FOR SUSTAINABILITY IN THE FACE OF GLOBAL CHANGE

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

25

GENERAL SUMMARY

Land use changes –particularly the expansion ofintensive agriculture, urbanisation and the development of transport infrastructures- arecurrently considered the biggest threat to biodiversity

The territory constitutes the physical support of allsystems, including ecosystems and essential ecologicalprocesses. One aspect that must be taken into accountin regard to biodiversity conservation is that the territoryis finite and this imposes certain limits and thresholdson its environmental functionality, as this functionalitydepends directly on the use made of the territory. So, forinstance, there is a need to keep a suitable proportion ofspaces occupied by natural vegetation and, also, of envi-ronmentally active rural landscapes, ie, with specificenvironmental functions complementary to those of thespaces occupied by natural vegetation. In theMediterranean region these environmentally activerural landscapes correspond to the traditional extensi-ve dry-farming areas and agroforestry spaces in whichareas occupied by agrarian uses and areas occupied bynatural vegetation exist in varying proportions. To thisshould be added the traditional irrigated lands situatedin the low-lying fertile areas along rivers or aroundsprings.

Most of the environmentally active rural landscape isoutside the protected areas, which means that it isessential to supplement those policies directly targetingthe conservation of particular habitats and species byothers aimed at the territory as a whole. Moreover,many species have a significant part of their populationoutside the protected areas or use the areas near themas places for grazing and food.

Artificial areas in Spain increased by 51.9% between1987 and 2006, to a large extent at the expense ofnatural areas and environmentally active agrarianareas, leading to a loss of biodiversity

According to the latest data available in 2010 from theCorine Land Cover (CLC) project, the increase in artifi-cial areas –up by 51.9%- is the most significant changein land use that took place in Spain between 1987 and2006 (Table GS.1). Whereas in 1987 they occupied 1.3%of the territory, by 2000 they represented 1.7% and by2006, 2.0%. It should be pointed out that the speed of theincrease in artificial areas accelerated in this latterperiod, going up from 13,112 ha/year in the period 1987-2000 to 29,500 ha/year between 2000 and 2006.

A significant proportion of the artificial areas were for-med from natural ecosystems, mainly forests, woo-dland-scrub, scrub and natural pastures which togetheraccounted for 27.4% of the artificial areas formed bet-ween 1987 and 2000, and 19.5% of those formed betwe-en 2000 and 2006. (Figure GS.5). It is also noteworthythat 18% of the new artificial areas created between1987 and 2000, and 14.9% of those created between2000 and 2006, were at the expense of agriculturalmosaics and natural vegetation.

In the case of agricultural areas, the most significantchange in use between 1987 and 2000 was the creationof 238,601 hectares of new irrigated land from dry-far-ming land. Between 2000 and 2006 there was also a sig-nificant loss of dry-farming land due to its transforma-tion into irrigated land (43,641 ha) and olive groves(56,138 ha). Some 20.6% of the new permanently culti-vated areas created in the period 1987-2006, and 12.1%in the period 2000-2006, came from agriculturalmosaics and natural vegetation.

Table GS.1. The main changes in land use in Spain 1987-2000-2006.

Area 1987 (ha)

Artificial areas 669,888 840,348 1,017,360 25.4 21.1 51.9 Agricultural areas 25,411,955 25,443,717 25,364,294 0.1 -0.3 -0.2 Forests and seminatural areas 24,192,357 23,953,160 23,852,221 -1.0 -0.4 -1.4 Wetlands 110,259 112,124 111,082 1.7 -0.9 -0.7 Water surfaces 284,119 321,011 328,184 13.0 2.2 15.5

Source: Produced by OSE from CLC project data.

Area 2000 (ha) Area 2006 (ha) % change 87-00 % change 00-06 % change 87-06

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

26

GENERAL SUMMARY

Figure GS.5. Formation of artificial areas in Spain from other types of land use in the periods 1987-2000 and 2000-2006.

Source: Produced by OSE from CLC project data.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

% c

hang

e

Others Natural pastures Forests and woodland scrub Scrub Agricultural mosaics and natural vegetation Artificial areas Permanently cultivated areas

1987-2000 2000-2006

Therefore, the proportion of the territory occupied bythe most environmentally active rural space is beingreduced by two processes: the intensification of farmingand the replacement of agricultural areas by artificialareas, and, to a lesser extent, the abandonment of far-ming, which gives rise to natural vegetation by means ofsecondary succession. This double process is genera-ting a gradual loss of the most purely rural landscape infavour of two extreme landscapes: that characterised byintensive use of the space and natural resources, andnatural landscape. The environmental interpretation ofthese two processes in relation to the degree of rever-sibility of the change in land use is very different in eachcase. Whereas abandonment constitutes a change ofuse with a high degree of reversibility –in fact, the boun-dary between natural vegetation and traditional lands-capes has been extremely dynamic over time-, thechangeover to intensive uses has low reversibility (in thecase of irrigated land) or practically none at all (in thecase of artificial processes), with the consequent frag-mentation and destruction of the habitats of many spe-cies and, in short, the loss of biodiversity.

Urban land and other artificial uses constitute a termi-nal use of the land, devoid of environmental functiona-lity, which results in big pressures on the rest of theterritory. The impact of artificial land uses on the terri-tory as a whole is far greater than might be supposed ifone were to take into account only the proportion of thetotal surface area they cover. This proportion is nor-mally low in comparison with other uses, such as natu-ral or agrarian land cover. However, artificial land coverexerts an influence on the rest of the territory that isexpressed through a large number of indirect proces-ses and effects impacting on much larger areas and,obviously, affecting biodiversity.

A case study of the Segura basin provides a perfectexample of an analysis of land cover changes taken as awhole and their impact on biodiversity (see box).Changes in land cover to do with the installation of windfarms are dealt with in the following box in view of theirparticular impact on biodiversity in Spain.

The object of the Natural Heritage and Biodiversity Act (Law 42/2007 of 13 December) is the conservation, sustainable use,improvement and restoration of the natural heritage and biodiversity. As well as incorporating international norms it laysdown lines of work and goals inspired by the CBD and other international commitments.

One of the main principles inspiring this law is the predominance of environmental protection over territorial and urbanplanning. The law establishes a set of specific instruments to ensure such protection –the natural resources managementplans- which are to prevail over territorial and urban planning instruments whenever they contradict one another. In addi-tion, these territorial planning instruments must adapt to the corresponding natural resources management plan.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

27

GENERAL SUMMARY

CHANGES IN LAND USE AND BIODIVERSITY LOSS IN THE SEGURA BASIN

The OSE, in collaboration with the University of Florida (USA) and the Observatory on Sustainability in the Murcia Region,has conducted a study on the territorial dynamics of this area in relation to the processes directly and indirectly affectingbiodiversity.

On the one hand, the Segura basin, characterised by low water availability and, therefore, low productivity of its ecosystems,contains a considerable degree of biodiversity, even in its driest areas. In spite of this aridity, the Segura basin area has anenormous wealth of flora, fauna and habitat as a result of its belonging to the Mediterranean region, its geographic posi-tion and the fact that it is a transition zone between the Mediterranean and the arid subtropical forest systems. On the otherhand, the south-east of the Iberian peninsula has been experiencing high rates of land cover change with intensive proces-ses of artificialisation and the formation of irrigated land, which exert strong pressure on these ecosystems.

One of the risks detected in the Segura basin has to do with the disappearance of the traditional rural cultures which, his-torically, have shaped a cultural landscape that has co-evolved with the basin’s biodiversity. The intensification of agricul-tural uses and, especially, the increase in new irrigated land, are displacing this type of cultivation. It is important to notethat the intensification of irrigated farming in the basin is related to the formation of artificial surfaces on irrigated land,thereby constituting a single process in which one type of land cover is replaced by another.

The formation of irrigated farming land affects the basin’s biodiversity both directly, by occupying and fragmenting habi-tats, and indirectly, by the changes it brings about in the water system. The increased amount of irrigated land has redu-ced the areas occupied by steppe together with their biodiversity, which is quite considerable in the European context, andit has also reduced the habitat of singular species such as the spur-thighed or Greek tortoise (Testudo graeca) and Ibero-African species such as the periploque (Periploca angustifolia). The increase in irrigated land has also affected extensivedry-farming land, which is of great trophic importance for many species. The changes in the basin’s water system haveresulted in increased agricultural drainage reaching the wetlands, such as those around the Mar Menor, where the areaoccupied by saline steppe has decreased and been replaced by other habitats that are less valuable from the standpoint ofthe Habitats Directive, and these changes have, in turn, altered the bird communities in these wetlands.

The rise in the amount of urban spaces and other artificial uses produces various effects on biodiversity. Land cover hasdirect effects by eliminating wild flora and fauna and their habitats, and the trophic spaces used by wild fauna as feedingand grazing areas. The indirect effects include the creation of barriers between wild populations as a result of the cons-truction of linear infrastructures, such as motorways, nuisances for wild fauna due to sound and light pollution in adjoiningareas, and, in the case of housing inside or in the vicinity of forest environments, an heightened risk of fires as a result ofmore visitors, roads and infrastructures associated with urban development, such as high voltage cables.

The infrastructures, especially high-capacity roads such as dual-carriageways and new motorways, create big barriers tothe movement of natural populations. This isolation of populations is one of the principal threats to protected and endan-gered species, especially mammals, reptiles and amphibians and is actually one of the main factors leading to the localextinction of many species.

CHANGES IN LAND USE AND BIODIVERSITY: WIND FARMS

Renewable energies are without doubt essential for mitigating the negative effects of climate change. However, in many caseswind farms occupy territories that are valuable for their habitats and the rare species that live in them (5, 6). Increasing frictionthus arises between two factors, in this case biodiversity conservation and clean energy production, that ought to work togetherin pursuit of a common goal. It is not a matter, therefore, of opposing the development of wind energy, but of minimising theenvironmental costs by means of an orderly and sensible introduction of wind power.

A study has been made in Spain of the geographical overlap between wind farms and the distribution of flying vertebrate spe-cies (birds and bats) (6). The study concluded that wind farms are grouped in the windiest areas of the Iberian peninsula and, inseveral cases, do not overlap the areas with the largest numbers of birds and bats. However, there is an important exception atthe headwaters of the Ebro and the northern Iberian system, where one of the biggest areas of the wind-power industry over-laps with one of the sectors richest in flying vertebrates (Map GS.1).

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

28

GENERAL SUMMARY

The lack of a large-scale strategic environmental assessment to forestall the impact of an expanding wind powerindustry on biodiversity in Spain is cause for concern. The shortage of relevant studies may be explained by the inertiaresulting from this industry’s early appearance (in the 1980s) in Spain when the impact of wind farms was not wellknown. This absence of assessments may also be related to the decentralised management of permits for building windfarms and the almost exclusively local approach to the impact of these infrastructures. Fortunately, this has not happe-ned with the planned marine wind farms, whose potential impact on the biodiversity of Spain’s coasts and territorialwaters, which are the responsibility of central government, has already been assessed at the scale of the whole of thecountry (8).

Map GS.1. Distribution of the major concentrations of wind farms in mainland Spain (the red dots indicate wind farms in2007) and the number of reproductive bird species, an indicator of the territory’s natural wealth as it coincides with the distri-bution patterns of their organisms. It is noteworthy that there is a concentration of wind farms in the most diverse areas of thenorthern Iberian system and a risk of their expanding towards the Cantabrian Mountains, the central system and the southernIberian system.

Source: Adapted from Tellería (2010) (7).

In the last 20 years Spain’s natural landscapes occupiedby endangered species have suffered the same degreeof human-induced change as the rest of the territory

In the areas where endangered species are present, thesurface area with natural land is significantly greaterand the surface area with anthropised land is less than

in the rest of the territory (Table GS.2). However, therates of change and anthropisation in the period 1987-2006 in these areas were no different from those outsi-de them. The fact of containing populations of endange-red species does not therefore appear to be a decisivefactor in halting the transforming pressure of our eco-nomic practice.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

29

GENERAL SUMMARY

Climate change is one of the main threats to biodiversity and will become even more important inthe future in mainland Spain and the archipelagos

Anthropic alterations to habitats and landscapes are notthe only pressures threatening the survival of endange-red species in Spain. There is sufficient evidence toprove conclusively the existence of changes in biologicalsystems as a consequence of climate change.

The geographic distribution of organisms is the spatial

If the present trend continues, artificial surfacescould grow very considerably in unprotected areas,negatively affecting the territory’s ecological connec-tivity and the spaces surrounding the protected areas

Protected areas taken as a whole provide one of the bigopportunities to achieve the conservation in situ ofnumerous extremely valuable habitats in Spain. Linkingthem up appropriately and halting the main threatsfrom which they suffer, such as changes in land cover,must be one of the priority lines of action in the future.

Between 1987 and 2006, the surface covered by artificialareas increased by 33.9% in the Protected Natural Spaces(PNS), by 67.0% in the Natura 2000 Network and by 52.1%in the unprotected areas. Estimates made of the futureevolution of land cover by means of linear simulations sug-gest that artificial surfaces will grow much more in unpro-tected than in protected areas (Figure GS.7). That is why itis especially important to promote sustainable territorymanagement to minimise the threats to biodiversity, notonly within the PNS, but also in the surrounding areas andin areas capable of acting as ecological corridors and refu-ges under both current and future climate conditions.

In the areas where endangered species are present, theextent that has suffered anthropisation is always biggerthan that which has undergone naturalisation (FigureGS.6). The lowest rates of change in land use are in thedistribution areas of vegetable species. Mobility and thegenerally greater geographic range of endangered ani-mal species probably lead them to have similar environ-mental interests to humans and enhance the competi-tion for space.

Table GS.2. Percentages of anthropisation and naturalisation of the UTM 10 x 10 km grid squares containing endangeredspecies (± 95% confidence interval) and of the cells in the rest of mainland Spain, and the percentages of natural, semi-anthro-pised and anthropised land according to CLC 2006 data.

Source: Produced by Lobo JM, Sánchez D and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

Natural, CLC2006 52,1±1,4 28,4±1,8Semi-anthropised, CLC2006 19,1±1,0 22,1±1,6Anthropised, CLC2006 28,7±1,3 47,3±2,1% change 2,5±0,2 2,5±0,3% anthropisation 1,7±0,1 1,6±0,2% naturalisation 0,8±0,1 0,9±0,1

Rest of territoryWith endangered species

Figure GS.7. Linear simulation of the evolution of the landcovered by artificial areas between 1987 and 2006 for tensteps, expressed as a percentage of the total surface area inthe PNSs, Natura 2000 Network Protected Spaces andunprotected areas.

Source: Produced by OSE from data supplied by the Ministry of theEnvironment and Rural and Marine Affairs, and the National GeographicInstitute (Ministry of Public Works)

15

5

02006 2070 21342038 2102

Per

cent

age

Protected Natural Spaces (PNS) Natura 2000 Network Protected Spaces Unprotected areas

Figure GS.6. Variation in the percentages of anthropisation,naturalisation and changes in land use of the UTM 10 x 10 km gridsquares in which endangered vertebrate, plant and invertebratespecies have been observed. The different symbols representaverage values, whereas the vertical lines represent the oscilla-tion range of 95% of the values.

Source: Produced by Lobo JM, Sánchez D and the ComputerisedBiogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

Anthropisation Naturalisation Change

%

Vertebrates Plants Invertebrates

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

30

GENERAL SUMMARY

projection of the synergic action of a large number offactors, of which climate is one, though there are alsomany others. Negative and facilitating biotic interac-tions, dispersal limitations, and contingent historicaleffects to do with the shape and relief of the areas andthe history of the organisms may have decisively condi-tioned the current shape, size and location of the distri-bution areas. The challenge in such circumstances is todistinguish the actual influence exercised by climatefactors from the effects produced by other factors inorder to transfer the results of distribution models pro-duced using current data to a future climate scenario.

Climate change will bring about a decrease in the distribution area of many forest species in the Iberianpeninsula and lead to less species diversity

Forecasts of the future distribution of 20 Iberian tree spe-cies in a climate change scenario indicate that the areacovered by them will diminish considerably as a conse-quence of climate change as the century progresses,although there is always a great deal of uncertainty abouttheir distribution patterns. Mountain conifers, such as

Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), mountain pine (P. uncinata)and European silver fir (Abies alba) will be particularlyaffected. The area covered by temperate forests, espe-cially European beech (Fagus sylvatica) woods and sessi-le oak (Quercus petraea) woods will also decrease. Thedistribution area of Mediterranean species, however, isless likely to recede as a result of climate change.

The models indicate that the distributions of the main treespecies in the Iberian peninsula do not extend to all theplaces climatically suited to them. Indeed, most of themare undergoing an expansion process towards otherareas in which they had hitherto not been present.Climate change will have a major impact on the expansionof Atlantic species: the continual growth of their distribu-tion area will give way to degrowth in the space of barelya few decades, as may happen with the pendunculate oak(Quercus robur, Figure GS.8a). In general, theMediterranean species will undergo changes in thegrowth trajectory forecast for their distribution area.Some of them, such as the Aleppo pine (P. halepensis,Figure GS.8b) will even benefit from climate change andoccupy larger areas than they would have done otherwise.

Lastly, there is likely to be a displacement of tree spe-cies distributions towards the north and high mountainareas, which might lead to a decline in the number ofspecies present, especially in the south of the peninsu-la. By acting as “refuges”, the mountain areas willincrease their species diversity, but the most likely out-come is that this increase will not last, as the lack ofhigher ground to which to migrate would eventually leadto the extinction of many local species.

The climate change forecast and simulations of the effectit will have on tree distribution suggest that it would beadvisable to adopt an adaptation policy by, for example,creating ecological corridors enabling species to “flee” inthe necessary direction, protecting areas that are going tobe vital for conserving certain species in the future andeven facilitating the propagation of certain species thatare unable to move at the speed required by climate chan-ge. This includes the conservation of species at highertrophic levels whose role as dispersers may be crucial.

Figure GS.8. Proyecciones de la fracción de ocupación del bosque en 2100, con y sin cambio climático para (a) el roblecomún (Q. robur) y (b) el pino carrasco (P. halepensis).

Source: Produced by OSE from García-Valdés et al. (2010) (9).

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Frac

tion

of fo

rest

cov

er (%

)

Without climate change With climate change

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

a)

year

25

20

15

10

5

0

Frac

tion

of fo

rest

cov

er (%

)

Without climate change With climate change

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

b)

year

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

31

GENERAL SUMMARY

The models estimate that 96 Iberian terrestrial verte-brate species will lose their favourable climatic condi-tions in 13% of the area they currently occupy, whichwill probably lead to local extinctions

The loss of favourable climatic conditions will occur mainlyin the Central System, Sierra Morena and Picos de Europa,as well as in the mountains of Cádiz and the areas withinthe boundaries of the provinces of the Basque Country andNavarre, the south of Galicia and the north of Zamora (MapGS.2a). It should be pointed out that the Central System isnot only an area of potential local extinctions for some spe-cies, but also a stable refuge for others (Map GS.2b). Thefact that the same area –as will happen with many moun-tain areas- may be simultaneously a threatened area and astable refuge presents a challenge for designing new natu-re reserves in the face of climate change.

On the other hand, there will be areas in which favourableclimatic conditions for certain species appear where theyhad not previously existed (colonisable refuges). In thiscase, the northern third of Spain and the Guadalquivirbasin will have the lowest reception capacity (Map GS.2c).

However, this is a complex matter, as these new poten-tial refuges will act as true receivers only if the species’dispersal capacity and anthropic land uses allow themto do so.

Although simulations can provide information on thepossible location of favourable climatic conditions for aparticular species, the formulation of species conserva-tion strategies must take into account the complexity ofthe many factors involved (interactions with other spe-cies, alterations to habitats, etc.), which makes it diffi-cult to achieve a reliable estimate of their geographicresponse.

This is due to the fact that climate change can affect aspecies’ biology in very different ways and these can actseparately or in combination with each other. Theresults of the type of models considered here must the-refore be regarded as a starting point for determiningwhich species should be monitored in order to clarifyhow and to what extent they may be affected by climatechange.

Local adaptation is essential for understanding the response of forest species to climate change

The ecological plasticity and local adaptation of forestspecies throughout their distribution areas have a biginfluence on the forecasts of the future occupation ofspace and must therefore be included in species distri-bution models. Calibrating these models with experi-mental data, such as survival rates, increases their bio-logical realism. These results are especially importantfor realistically quantifying the vulnerability of forestecosystems in the face of climate change.

For example, in the case of the Scots pine (Pinus sylves-tris) and the cluster or maritime pine (P. pinaster),those in the south are better pre-adapted to withstan-ding the rising temperatures associated with climatechange (Figure GS.9). On the contrary, the distributionareas of the populations in the north of the peninsulawill shrink with global warming. Conserving geneticdiversity is therefore essential for adapting to climatechange.

Figure GS.9. Probability of cover by P. sylvestris (a) and P. pinaster (b) for 2020, 2050 and 2080 (scenario A2 HadCM3), as a per-centage of present cover. The results are shown for each of the origin groups separately, all the groups together and the resultsobtained using a niche model calibrated only according to the absence or presence of the species.

Source: Produced by OSE on the basis of data from Benito Garzón et al. (2010) (10).

100

80

60

40

20

0

Are

a co

vere

d (%

)

All origins Central System Iberian System Sierra Nevada Pyrenees Special Distribution Models: presence/absence

Present 2020 2050 2080

150

100

50

0

Are

a co

vere

d (%

)

All origins Sierra Segura Meseta Galicia Sierra Nevada Iberian System Special Distribution Models: presence/absence

Present 2020 2050 2080

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

32

GENERAL SUMMARY

Map GS.2. Geographical distribution of a) losses of favourable climatic conditions, b) stable refuges and c) new colonisable refu-ges for 96 endangered vertebrate species according to the CCM3 scenario for 2100. The warmer colours indicate a larger numberof species.

Source: Produced by Aragón P, Lobo JM and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

The intensity and size of fires will increase, particularlyin the southwest quadrant of the Peninsula, dependingon the climate change scenarios

The predictive models indicate that the Fire Weather Index(FWI) will register extremely high values (FWI › 30) by theend of this century (Map GS.3 a,b,c), so situations in whichit is more difficult to deal with fires are likely to occur

more frequently. The fire alert period –the number of daysbetween the first and last time in the year in which the FWIis continuously high for seven consecutive days (MapGS.3d,e,f)- will also greatly increase, particularly on theMediterranean coast and in the southern half of thecountry. This will mean the fire-fighting services will haveto bring forward their fire prevention campaigns andremain on alert for longer.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

33

GENERAL SUMMARY

Source: Data from Europarc-España, Moreno et al. (2010) (11) and Urbieta IR, Zavala G, Mateo RG and Moreno JM.

Map GS.3. Observed Fire Weather Index (FWI) for the fire season (May-October) (1975-2004) (a) and future FWI (2071- 2100)under A2 (b) and B2 (c) emission scenarios. The values shown are the average of the five climate models analysed. The FWI valuesindicate the fire risk as follows: very low (0-5), low (5-10), moderate (10-20), high (20-30) and very high (›30). Fire alert period (indays) as observed (d) and predicted change by the end of the century under A2 (e) and B2 (f) emission scenarios. UTM 50x50 kmgrid squares.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

34

GENERAL SUMMARY

Effective environmental integration of the agrariansector, which means both enhanced competitivenessand an improved environment as a result of goodpractices, is essential for biodiversity conservationand rural sustainability

In Spain, a large part of the existing biodiversity is linkedto the agrarian environment, especially extensive far-ming systems, and its conservation depends to a greatextent on the way this environment is managed.

One of the strongest pressures impinging on biodiver-sity is the growth of intensive farming methods as theresult of the specialisation and concentration of produc-tion that has taken place over the past few decades.Agrarian production has been concentrated in an everdecreasing number of farms that have expanded in sizeand tended to specialise in monocrop production.

The increased in productivity has been strongest on themost fertile and accessible lands, while the lack of com-petitiveness of traditional farming practices, which havesurvived in certain areas and are associated with a highdegree of biological diversity, has led to many marginalagricultural areas being abandoned as the farmers and

livestock breeders who ran the generally small, low-income farms have been forced to give up their busines-ses.

The number of small farmers and shepherds has fallenalarmingly, extensive farming has been gradually rece-ding, the mosaic patterns of traditional landscapes havebeen disappearing in many areas and cultural and wil-dlife diversity have been diminishing.

For farming to be compatible with biodiversity conservationit must be managed on a sustainable basis, in other words,employing integrated rural development strategies inwhich the concept of sustainable farming is seen as theresponse to intensive agriculture and livestock breeding,and is considered an appropriate solution providing a com-promise between the countryside and the environment.

Traditional cultivation techniques, such as crop rotation,the conservation of permanent pastures, and the con-servation and restoration of natural landscape featuresinterspersed among the crops, are essential, togetherwith agroenvironmental measures and general com-pliance with the relevant legislation, for sustainableagriculture to continue.

Mountain areas are valuable reservoirs of biodiversityand traditional cultures that are threatened by thecurrent socio-economic development model and climate change

In mountain areas, even slight variations in temperatu-re, rainfall or soil stability can result in the completedisappearance of plant and animal communities.Policies designed for lower-lying areas that ignore thevulnerability of the mountains and the strong demandfor their resources by the populations on the plain arefactors that have a strong environmental impact onhigh-altitude areas.

In addition to their high degree of biodiversity, themountains are places where traditional farming practi-ces suited to the harsh environmental conditions,reflecting not only traditional knowledge, but also awealth of cultural and spiritual values, are still used.However, as happens in lower-lying areas, but to a gre-ater extent in mountain areas, there has been a drasticdecline in extensive farming over the past few decades

as a consequence, on the one hand, of the introductionof more productive farming techniques that are envi-ronmentally more aggressive and, on the other, thegeneralised abandonment of marginal farming areasthat are less productive, but in many cases support agreater range of biodiversity than “natural” ecosystemsin their mature state.

Overfishing is changing the structure and functioningof the marine ecosystems

The species harvested from the sea belong to high tro-phic levels, which forces the capture of species fromlower trophic levels. Estimates for the Bay of Biscayindicate that there has been a reduction in the trophiclevel (Figure GS.10) (12), whereas data obtained over alonger period from the Spanish coasts show differentoutcomes depending on the area (13). On the Iberiancoast, there were two periods in which the level fell,while it remained more or less stable the rest of thetime; on the Canary Islands’ coast, the trophic level hasbeen declining since the 1970s (Figure GS.11).

Law 45/2007, the Sustainable Rural Development Act, lays special emphasis on the sustainable development of the Natura2000 sites by defining them as priority areas for the implementation of the Sustainable Rural Development Programme,which is the central government’s main rural development planning instrument. This implies preferential treatment by thenational system of regional economic incentives, differentiated consideration in the national business promotion plans, pre-ferential implementation of measures to foster the creation and maintenance of employment, etc.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

35

GENERAL SUMMARY

Another effect of exploitation on marine biodiversity has todo with the type of fishing tackle used: bottom trawling, atechnique employed all along the Spanish coast up todepths of more than 500 metres, has a bigger effect thanothers. The direct physical effect, but also the disappearan-ce or abandonment, of certain techniques, including rollerand rockhopping gear that is used in even very ruggedareas, may have an impact that has not been accuratelyquantified in Spain. Longline fishing also has a harmfuleffect on certain communities such as white coral reefs.

Since 1980, 17% of the Posidonia oceanica meadows inthe Mediterranean have shrunk by 50%

Posidonia oceanica, a phanerogram endemic to theMediterranean, forms meadows that are of great environ-mental importance, as they are a refuge and a source offood for innumerable species, with the result that the net-work of trophic relations surrounding these meadows ishighly complex. In addition, they help to protect the coastli-ne against erosion. Posidonia stem density has been decre-asing, which is regarded as an indicator of the degenerationof the meadows (Figure GS.12). The losses affect both pro-tected areas and areas with pronounced anthropogeniceffects. Among the possible causes put forward are eutro-phification, alteration of the balance of coastal sediments,rising temperatures, pathogens and invasive species.

The appearance of fish species and other taxonomicgroups with subtropical affinities is becoming moreand more frequent as they expand northwards

Changes in the composition of marine fish communitieshave been linked with the efficiency in recruiting certaincommercially valued fish species in northern Europeanwaters, but there is no clear evidence of this on the

Figure GS.10. Changes in the trophic level of fishing in theBay of Biscay.

4.15

4.10

4.05

4.00

3.95

3.90

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Trop

hic

leve

l

Source: Sánchez and Olaso (2004) (34).

Figure GS.11. Marine Trophic Index in: a) the Iberian CoastLarge Marine Ecosystem (LME); b) the Mediterranean LME; c)the Canaries Current LME.

3.6

3.5

3.4

3.3

3.2

3.1

3.0

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

Trop

hic

leve

l

a)

3.4

3.3

3.2

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Trop

hic

leve

l

b)

3.5

3.4

3.3

3.2

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Trop

hic

leve

l

c)

Source: Pauly (2007) (10).

Figure GS.12. Recent changes in Posidonia stem density(2000-2008) in the Cabrera archipelago.

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

01.0

1.00

01.1

0.01

01.0

1.02

01.0

1.03

01.0

1.04

01.0

1.05

01.0

1.06

01.0

1.07

01.0

1.08

Stem

den

sity

(sta

lks

m-2

)

Date (day-month-year)

Es Castell, 15 mCabrera ArchipelagoNatural Park

Source: Marbà (2009) (14).

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

36

GENERAL SUMMARY

Spanish coasts (15). There is evidence, however, of chan-ges in the composition of the fish communities exploitedin waters close to the Bay of Biscay, so it would be nosurprise to find that the same process was taking placein Spanish waters (16,17).

These changes may be of great economic importance inthe future. Changes have already been described in fis-hing grounds associated with the presence of subtropi-cal species and the northward movement of otherexploited species (18,19); changes have also been recor-ded in Canary Island waters (20). This type of changes islikely to be a very general phenomenon and increasinglydetailed information on them is being gathered.

There was considerable destruction of inland watersystems in Spain in the 20th century

Exhaustion of water resources and pollution are themain anthropic actions affecting the biodiversity ofaquatic inland ecosystems in Spain. The former, asso-ciated with excessive use of water for irrigation, beganin the 1970s and has affected both surface and ground-water (21). The effects of pollution due to urban andindustrial wastewater began to be felt in the mid 1960s(22). Special mention should be made of phosphorouspollution (eutrophication) of urban origin and as a resultof nitrates used in agriculture (23,24).

CONSERVATION STATUS OF WETLANDS AND IMPORTANT BIRD CONSERVATION AREAS (IBAS)

In 2008 SEO/BirdLife assessed the conservation status of the 25 most important wetlands for birds in Spain. According tothis study, which took into account the degree of the threats affecting these wetlands and the trends of wintering bird popu-lations over a 15-year period, the condition of six wetlands is “worrying”, that of 12 is “stable” and that of seven is “favou-rable” (Map GS.4).

Map GS.4. Conservation status of the 25 most important wetlands for birds in Spain.

Source: Produced by OSE from SEO/BirdLife (2010) (25).

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

37

GENERAL SUMMARY

Biological invasions are recognised all over the worldas one of the biggest threats to native biodiversity;what is more, they can cause major socio-economicdamage

Variations in commercial patterns (new tourist destina-tions, changes in primary productivity, etc.) in responseto climate change may eventually alter the compositionof the invasive species that are spreading across theworld. New economic agreements can increase com-merce along existing trade routes or open up new rou-

tes affecting the number of species transported, theirsurvival rates during the journey and how frequentlythey are introduced.

The characteristics of the host ecosystems play a crucialrole in their response to biological invasions. The distur-bances brought about in the ecosystems as a consequen-ce of climate change may create unfavourable conditionsfor native species that are unable to adapt to the chan-ging environment, while on the contrary favouring newlyintroduced species which, since they are better able to

The study also examined the conservation status of 35 Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in which water-dependent birds are pre-sent. The results were that the state of 75% of the IBAs assessed was “unfavourable” or showed an “unfavourable trend”(Map GS.5).

Map GS.5. Conservation status of 35 IBAs in which water-dependent birds are present.

Source: Produced by OSE from SEO/BirdLife (2010) (25).

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

38

GENERAL SUMMARY

adapt, are more competitive. In this way climate changecan provide favourable conditions for alien species themovement of which is increased by human activities.

In estimating the future distribution of invasive alienspecies in response to the effects of climate change, adifferent approach is required from that used for

authocthonous species. Invasive alien species are gene-rally abundant, their biological characteristics are verydifferent (wider tolerance ranges to different conditions,faster juvenile stages) and so too are the managementgoals, which means that climate may play a secondaryrole in the introduction, settlement and/or expansion ofinvasive alien species.

Current conservation measures are primarily based onfavouring the survival of various species of vertebratesand plants, but also on creating a number of sanctua-ries more or less protected from the most adversehuman impacts in order to represent the different typesof landscapes and ecosystems. This strategy neglectsthe information about the groups of organisms thataccount for the biggest biodiversity in Spain (invertebra-tes) and fails to take into consideration the subjectiveand anthropomorphic nature of biological entities suchas habitats, ecosystems, landscape categories, vegeta-tion categories and ecoregions.

What is required, therefore, is a change in strategy thatwill lead to effective planning of the territory, promotethe maintenance of ecological processes and considerthe declaration of Protected Natural Sites as the mostextreme limitation to which part of the territory may besubjected, but the use of which must always be theobject of planning. In this context, integration of biodi-versity considerations into the different sectoral policiesis crucial, since, as a general rule, the budget allocatedto direct management of natural environment conser-vation measures is far less than that allocated to activi-ties likely to have a negative effect on the environment.

RESPONSE MECHANISMS FOR THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIODIVERSITY

The All-Spain Natural Heritage and Biodiversity Strategic Plan is the instrument created by Law 42/2007 for natural heri-tage and biodiversity planning to promote the conservation, sustainable use and, where appropriate, restoration of herita-ge, terrestrial and marine natural resources, and biodiversity and geodiversity. The Plan will contain a diagnosis and defi-ne targets, actions and criteria for achieving its ends.

There are no action plans in place for the vast majorityof animal species and populations requiring specificgovernment measures to ensure their conservation

Only 9.4% of the animal species with the worst conser-vation status have at least one action plan in some part

of their distribution area. None of the other listed ani-mal species has any plan approved in any of the autono-mous communities. Indeed, none of the autonomouscommunities has developed all the actions plans neces-sary to protect the endangered species or populations inits territory (Table GS.3).

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

39

GENERAL SUMMARY

Half the plans that have been approved (53.5%) are forbirds and birds make up half the species for which planshave been adopted (48.4%). Almost a quarter of theplans (23.8%) are for mammals and almost a quarter ofthe species for which there are plans (21.9%) are mam-mals. Action plans have been approved for only sixinvertebrate, six fish, four amphibian and three reptilespecies.

The worst situations are in the Murcia Region, theCommunity of Madrid and Andalusia, which have notapproved any action plans for either listed animals orplants in the 20 years since the first EndangeredSpecies Catalogue appeared (Figure GS.13). The situa-tion is similar in Cantabria and Galicia, where only a sin-gle plan –for the recovery of the brown bear- has beenapproved.

1) In Asturias the capercaillie was originally put into the “Sensitive to the Alteration of its Habitat” category and a plan was drawnup for the conservation of its habitat. However, it was later put into the “Endangered” category and a recovery plan for it has stillto be drawn up. In this study, the conservation plan was treated as though it were a recovery plan. For three other species inAsturias –the Egyptian vulture, Schreiber’s bat and Geoffroy’s bat- a management plan has been produced, although a conserva-tion plan was in order. These three management plans have been counted as though they were conservation plans.2) Castile and León has approved a conservation plan for the wolf that has been included in the reckoning, although this speciesis not in the National Catalogue, nor has Castile and León approved its Regional Catalogue.3) Catalonia has approved a conservation plan for the otter, included in the reckoning, although this species is classed as ofSpecial Interest in the National Catalogue (Catalonia has not approved its Regional Catalogue).4) The Basque Country is a special case, as it approves plans independently for each provinces, so a plan has been considered tohave been approved if it has been approved in at least one province. In the case of the European mink, plans have been approvedin three provinces, but they have been counted as a single plan.

Tabla GS.3. The action plans that must be drawn up by each autonomous community for listed animal species (not countingspecies classed as “of special interest”), the plans already approved by each autonomous community (not counting the mana-gement plans for species classed as “of special interest”) and the extent of the Protected Natural Sites (PNSs) in each autono-mous community.

FISHAUTONOMOUSCOMMUNITY

Number of plans for threatened species to be prepared by each autonomous community Protected space

REPTILES MAMMALS TOTAL

Andalucía 6 0 1 17 19 13 56 0 (0%) 1,630,375 18.6 Aragón 6 1 2 22 16 11 58 4 (6.9%) 155,513 3.3 Asturias (1) 1 2 0 8 15 4 30 12 (40%) 237,086 22.4 IBaleares 0 1 1 10 11 4 27 12 (44.4) 74,548 14.9 Canarias 2 0 6 22 11 25 66 4 (6.1%) 302,606 40.7 Cantabria 2 2 0 12 20 25 61 1 (1.6%) 194,812 36.5 Castilla y León (2) 1 0 0 8 13 2 25 6 (24%) 629,622 6.7 Castilla La Mancha 4 1 3 58 23 3 92 5 (5.4%) 326,394 4.1 Cataluña (3) 6 0 3 14 15 8 47 6 (12.8%) 1,007,895 31.3 Valencia 5 2 3 32 16 12 70 6 (8.6%) 233,473 10.0 Extremadura 7 6 2 50 19 14 98 10 (10.2) 314,496 7.5 Galicia 3 7 13 28 19 18 88 1 (1.1%) 364,039 12.3 Madrid 4 4 5 24 18 39 94 0 (0%) 113,520 14.1 Murcia 1 0 1 27 19 5 53 0 (0%) 78,299 6.8 Navarra 3 2 1 35 19 1 61 4 (6.6%) 84,905 8.2 País Vasco (4) 7 6 2 38 29 4 86 10 (11.6%) 99,149 13.7 La Rioja 1 0 0 6 11 1 19 5 (26.3%) 166,318 33.0

AMPHI-BIANS BIRDS INVERTEBRATES PNS AREA

(HA)NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE

PNS AREA(%)

Source: Produced by OSE from data in Calzada J, Román J and Yuste CS; and Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs (2010).

Figure GS.13. Degree to which the different autonomouscommunities have fulfilled their obligation to approve plansfor the listed animal species (other than those “of specialinterest”).

Source: Produced by Calzada J, Román J and Yuste CS

Percentage Nº of plans

I. B

alea

res

P. A

stur

ias

La R

ioja

Cas

tilla

y L

eón

Cat

aluñ

a

Paí

s Va

sco

Extr

emad

ura

C. V

alen

cian

a

Arag

ón

C.F

. Nav

arra

Can

aria

s

C.-

La M

anch

a

Can

tabr

ia

Gal

icia

R. M

urci

a

C. M

adri

d

Anda

lucí

a

4540303025201510

50

Plans approved

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

40

GENERAL SUMMARY

Giving the Natura 2000 Network spaces PNS statuswould double the protected territory, but would meanonly a 6% increase in the PNS network’s climaticrepresentativeness

If ensuring that protected spaces contain the broadestpossible spectrum of environmental conditions is a way ofmaximising their conservation capacity, as this increasesthe likelihood of communities of singular organismsappearing in them, it is obvious that there are shortco-mings that need to be addressed and corrected. Some60% of the territory whose climate is not represented hasnatural land uses and is not part of the Natura 2000Network. It covers a sufficiently large area (roughly 20,000square kilometres) to enable the selection of alternativeenclaves that would improve the current environmentalcover of the reserves network.

An examination of the location of these areas whose cli-mates are not represented in the PNS shows that they aremainly in the south of Galicia, the mountain ranges betwe-en León and Zamora, the region of Los Ancares, the wes-tern mountain ranges of Salamanca bordering on the pro-vince of Cáceres, Sierra de Villafranca in the province ofÁvila, the north of Navarre and Huesca, the mountain ran-ges between Teruel, Castellón and Valencia, SierraBermeja in the province of Málaga, Sierra de Almijara andthe south of the Alpujarras. Around 59% of the main areaswhose climate is not represented in the PNS is not inclu-ded in the Natura 2000 Network and, according to theCORINE Land Cover 2006 project (Map GS.6) has naturalland uses, which means that they can be regarded asterritories of interest for conservation.

Source: Produced by Lobo JM and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

Map GS.6. Location of the areas whose climate is not represented by the most important PNS or the Natura 2000 Network.These climatically important areas are the result of representing geographically the frequency of 1-square- kilometre cellswith climatic conditions not included in the PNSs, taking frequency values equal to or greater than the upper decile as thethreshold. The 1 km2 cells at least part of which lies within the Natura 2000 Network and contains anthropised or semi-anthro-pised land cover have been eliminated from the climatically important areas.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

41

GENERAL SUMMARY

At least 23 additional protected areas would be needed to represent adequately the terrestrial vertebrates andvascular plants, while between 6 and 69 new reserves would be required for endangered invertebrates

Source: Produced by Lobo JM and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

Map GS.7. Location of the 50 x 50 km UTM cells that would need to be added to the present PNS network for all the terres-trial vertebrate and vascular plant species in mainland Spain to be represented. Protected cells are defined here as those withmore than 2% of their surface area within a PNS. The red dots are irreplaceable cells possessing species that cannot be foundin other cells, while the blue dots represent replaceable cells. The green polygons represent the current PNS network.

Source: Produced by Lobo JM and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

Map GS.8. Location of 10 x 10 km cells with endangered invertebrate species that are not included in the present PNS net-work, protected cells being defined here as those with more than 2% of their surface area within a PNS. The blue dots repre-sent locations inhabited by species without any populations in the PNS, while the red dots represent populations of the otherendangered species not protected by the PNS.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

42

GENERAL SUMMARY

The PNS’ future climate will be different from what itis now, the typically Iberian conditions moving north-wards and the appearance of new, drier conditions inthe southern half of the peninsula

The PNSs in the north and north-west of the Iberianpeninsula tend to be affected by decreased rainfall and

rising temperatures that bring them closer to thecurrent average conditions in the peninsula as a whole,whereas conditions in the PNS in the rest of the penin-sula are moving away from the overall average, withrainfall and temperature values similar to thosecurrently found in North Africa (Map GS.9).

For biodiversity conservation to be effective, it mustbe integrated into the different sectoral policies

As noted in the European Council’s 2008 BiodiversityStrategy, the inclusion of biodiversity concerns in sectoral

policies, such as those for agriculture, fishing, regionalpolicies and spatial planning, energy and transport, tou-rism, development and economic cooperation, is of cru-cial importance.

Map GS.9. Future climatic distance of each PNS from present average climatic conditions. A high positive value means the PNSis moving away from present average conditions, while a negative value means it is moving towards present average conditions.

Source: Produced by Lobo JM and the Computerised Biogeography Laboratory of the National Natural History Museum.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

43

GENERAL SUMMARY

Ecosystem services are essential for human welfare.The lack of an adequate assessment of the total well-being generated by them leads to a deteriorationof biodiversity

The environmental consequences of biodiversity loss rangefrom microscale changes to the destruction of entire ecos-ystems and services, which might even affect our prospe-rity in the future. As the European Commission’s study The

Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) pointsout, this process will continue as long as the value of theconservation of ecosystem services for society’s well-beinggoes unrecognised. However, calculating this value is noeasy task. In recent years, particularly in the last two deca-des, economists, ecologists and social scientists have coo-perated in order to improve the valuation of biodiversity inmonetary, social and political terms so that it can be incor-porated into the decision-making process.

The inclusion of biodiversity in sectoral policies is one of the main aims of Law 42/2007, the Natural Heritage andBiodiversity Act, article 2 of which establishes the integration of conservation, sustainable use, and improvement and res-toration of the natural heritage and biodiversity requirements into sectoral policies as a guiding principle. Article 5, section(f) states that: “Public authorities must integrate into sectoral policies the objectives and forecasts necessary for the con-servation and valuation of the Natural Heritage, the protection of Biodiversity and Geodiversity, the conservation and sus-tainable use of natural resources, and the maintenance and, where appropriate, the restoration of the integrity of ecos-ystems”. To this end, article 14 stipulates that Sectoral Plans must be drawn up by 2012 to flesh out the All-Spain NaturalHeritage and Biodiversity Strategic Plan with a view to integrating the aims and actions regarding biodiversity into the sec-toral policies that are the responsibility of central government. The sectors for which guidelines already exist for drawingup such plans include tourism, energy, industry, health, transport, agriculture, hunting, fishing, aquiculture and trade.

Figure GS.14. Methodological framework for evaluating services based on a complementary approach to the differentdimensions that includes the concept of services - from the capacity of ecosystems to supply them to the social demand forsuch services.

Source: Adapted from Haines-Young and Postching (2010) (26).

Structure andecologicalfunctioning

(eg net primaryproductivity)

Function

(eg carboncapture)

BIOPHYSICALASSESSMENT

SOCIOCULTURALASSESSMENT

SERVICE· climate stability· food BENEFIT

· basic material for living: food· health: favourable climate

MONETARYVALUE· crop prices· price of carbon in the Kyoto Protocol framework

MONETARYVALUATION

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

44

GENERAL SUMMARY

Compensating preservation and creating conservationinitiatives are two useful tools for reducing biodiver-sity loss: payment for environmental services andstewardship of the territory are two examples of this

Payment for environmental services and stewardship ofthe territory are mechanisms that, if properly definedand used in situations in which there is no risk of crea-ting counterproductive incentives, enable ongoingimprovement of the offerers’ quality of life, the resour-ce and its natural environment, and, therefore, help toincrease the sustainability of the system over time,rewarding the generation of positive environmentalexternalities by transferring financial resources fromthe beneficiaries of certain services to those who provi-de these services or are trustees of environmentalresources.

These mechanisms contribute to local and global sus-tainability, as they increase the economic benefit of bothparties while providing motivation for environmentalconservation by implementation at the local level witheffects at the global level.

Biodiversity and business: the path to business excellence

The business sector can make essential contributions tobiodiversity conservation. Biodiversity considerations arebeginning to form part of strategic business approachesto global sustainable development cooperation, as happe-ned with climate change a few years ago.

Both the results of the latest global surveys on corporateattitudes to biodiversity and the plans and programmesimplemented by the European Union and the individualmember-States clearly show that today’s companies nolonger look on biodiversity in terms of risks and now seeit as a competitive advantage, over and above the simplealtruistic, ethical and corporate reputation arguments infavour of it.

Modern companies are aware that investment in the con-servation of the natural environment and biodiversity

offers the benefit of maintaining healthy ecosystems thatare the foundation of a sustainable company and, therefo-re, of the durability of the production system.

One of the main measures advocated in this connection bythe EU Biodiversity Action Plan is the setting up of public-private partnerships, as it is convinced that the businesscommunity can and must make a significant contributionto halting biodiversity loss.

The knowledge base, communication and awareness-raising in regard to biodiversity all needto be improved

Although much progress has been made regarding kno-wledge about biodiversity, there still exist shortco-mings: there is a need for more reliable data, greaterknowledge of the taxonomy, biogeography and ecologyof the organisms existing in Spain, the development ofindicators and a centralised information system. Inaddition, to anticipate the consequences of climatechange alarm, detection and long-term monitoringsystems are required.

The information currently available on biodiversity isstrongly biased, as it is aimed at the conservation ofcertain emblematic taxonomic groups. Moreover, thisbias is carried over into the media, the funds, resourcesand policies for supporting biodiversity conservation,and the public, who do not perceive the threat that bio-diversity loss represents to their quality of life.Correcting this bias and integrating a coherent appro-ach into policies, strategies and educational and com-munication campaigns is essential to bring about thecultural change that biodiversity conservation requires.

The Assessment of Spain’s Natural Assets carried out by the Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs,published in 2010, estimated the economic value of the functions and services of each hectare of the country’s territory(land and sea), and its relative importance in monetary units referenced to 2005. As the study points out, the services sup-plied by nature were valued on the basis of conditions of indefinite provision, without putting the ecosystems providing themat risk. For example, the forest carbon capture service provided by trees was valued at 1,951,286,640 euros/year, the car-bon capture service provided by scrubland was valued at 694,192,873 euros/year and by farmland at 26,278,171 euros/year.The erosion control service was valued at 49,445394 euros/year. Agrarian production was valued at 24,216,106 euros/yearand the recreational service provided by the inland environment was estimated as being worth 49,448,792 euros/year.

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITYCONSERVATION IN SPAIN

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

47

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN SPAIN

In addition to the results set out in this report on thestatus and trends of biodiversity in Spain as a basis forsustainability in the face of global change, OSE propo-ses a number of action guidelines to correct some of theimbalances that have been detected. Without preten-ding to be exhaustive, it has identified ten major lines ofstrategic intervention to help stem the deterioration ofbiodiversity and ecosystems that translate into theSpanish context the main lines of European and globalbiodiversity policies.

1. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION GLOBAL CHANGE AND ITS INTERRELATIONS -IN PARTICULAR, ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE- IS A PRIORITY FOR SUSTAINABLE BIODIVERSITYMANAGEMENT

Spain is a country particularly vulnerable to globalchange. Integrated territory and protected area mana-gement measures must be implemented taking intoaccount the interactions between climate change, landcover, desertification and other global phenomena. Aspointed out in this report, there is a wealth of evidencethat climate change is already directly affecting indivi-dual organisms, populations and ecosystem structuresand functions in Spain.

In implementing proactive and adaptive managementmeasures it is essential to take into consideration thecomposition and extent of ecosystems forecast by clima-te change models. Such measures must inevitably inclu-de redesigning the network of protected sites and ecolo-gical corridors taking into account both the currently exis-ting protected sites and those that need to be set up in theareas towards which species are going to migrate as aconsequence of climate change, in other words, the areasthat will act as refuges in the future. This report presentsan initial proposal concerning the location of such refugesfor a number of terrestrial vertebrates.

2. BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT MUST EXTEND BEYOND THE PROTECTED AREAS AND FAVOUR SUSTAINABLE USE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE TERRITORIALINTERACTIONS

Biodiversity conservation cannot be achieved by protec-ting certain habitats and species alone. It is also neces-sary to preserve low-intensity land uses that favour thedynamics of natural processes and help to maintain orincrease biodiversity over large land areas. Therefore thepressures on biodiversity in the territory must be reducedoutside the protected areas, which is where many spe-cies have a significant part of their populations or usenearby areas for grazing and feeding. The way in whichthe land is used is one of the biggest threats to biodiver-sity and, therefore, to the provisioning of ecosystem ser-vices that can favour territorial and rural sustainability.

Maintaining ecological coherence and territorial con-nectivity must be a priority of a territorial sustainabilitystrategy, especially bearing in mind the growing frag-mentation of the territory and the new environmentalconditions climate change will impose on species andhabitats. In this context, the strategy the EU is planningto implement towards a green infrastructure forEurope, which is a crucial element of its biodiversitypolicy for the future, offers a big opportunity for theimplementation of integrated approaches to territorialplanning in Spain.

3. EXISTING MECHANISMS FOR THE CONSERVATION OF PRIORITY SPECIES AND HABITATS MUST BE STRENGTHENED

Action priorities must focus on ensuring that ecos-ystems are well conserved and kept in that state to pre-vent future species loss, and that damaged ecosystemsare restored in order to stop them from deteriorating.

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

48

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN SPAIN

The changes that have taken place in natural landsca-pes over the past twenty years in Spain seem to haveaffected equally places with a known presence ofendangered species and the rest of the territory.

It is therefore essential to effectively protect the habi-tats and species requiring special attention from theconservation standpoint through effective managementmeasures that must be put in place immediately. Suchmeasures should include:

· Drawing up and implementing endangered speciesaction plans (plans stipulated in the different natureprotection laws for listed species).· Preparing and implementing management measu-res in the existing PNSs. · Designating Special Conservation Areas by appro-ving the corresponding management plans.· Designating new protected sites taking into accountclimatic, faunistic and floristic representativenesscriteria. This report makes an initial proposal con-cerning which areas these might be.

4. PREVENTION OF THE EFFECTS CAUSED BY INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND THEIR INTERACTIONSWITH CLIMATE CHANGE MUST BE INCORPORATEDINTO BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT AS A MATTER OF PRIORITY

Identification of new potential invasion areas, detectionof potential entry routes, identification of synergies withother global change factors and quantification of therisk associated with each invasive alien species are allextremely important.

It is therefore essential to integrate into climate changeadaptation policies management measures to cope withbiological invasions and strengthen the resilience ofecosystems. Such measures must be introduced parti-cularly in regard to the species and entry routes/vectorsidentified as high-risk.

5. FOREST FIRES ARE PARTICULARLY A THREATTO BIODIVERSITY IN SPAIN, SO THEIR PREVENTIONMUST BE INCORPORATED INTO INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Climate change and its possible effect on the risk offires must lead to a reconsideration of the managementpolicies for protected natural sites, as at the presenttime conservation plans rarely include the role of fire.

Models need to be produced that are adapted to ecos-ystems and species, and take into account the growingdangers that can increase the frequency, intensity andmagnitude of fires.

Lastly, the need to protect the territory in general againstfires should not be forgotten given its importance in a cli-mate change context in which it will be essential to guaran-tee the existence of biological corridors enabling species tomove to territories where the climate is more favourable.

6. AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO NATURAL CAPITAL AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FAVOURS THE INTEGRATION OF BIODIVERSITY INTO SECTORAL POLICIES

The destruction of natural capital and the degradation ofecosystem goods and services is having a negative effecton the functioning of the economic system and social andterritorial cohesion, so an integrating approach is neededto meet the growing pressures exerted by production andconsumption patterns, and the multitude of sectoral acti-vities. This ecosystem approach is crucial to increase theresilience of the socioeconomic system as a whole.

The integration of matters concerning the conservationand sustainable use of biodiversity into different secto-ral policies (farming, fishing, energy, transport andterritorial development) is vital in order to reducecurrent biodiversity loss. Only in this way will it be pos-sible to diminish the direct impact of these sectors andtheir diffuse pressures, such as fragmentation, acidifi-cation, eutrophication and pollution.

In the case of agrarian and rural development policies,which are essential for the conservation of terrestrialecosystem biodiversity, traditional extensive farmingmethods must be maintained, modernising them withnew, environmentally non-aggressive techniques, andpromoting them through payment to farmers and lives-tock breeders for the environmental services theysupply to the rest of society by conserving biodiversitythrough their activities. This will also make it possible toset the rural population on a sustainability path asregards quality of life, social cohesion and employment.

In the case of the marine environment, fishing is themain source of income of many coastal communities,but overfishing is threatening the viability of fish popu-lations, so integrating this sector into environmentalplans is vital for the conservation and sustainable use ofmarine biodiversity.

7. BIODIVERSITY PERFORMS IMPORTANT ECONOMIC FUNCTIONS THAT MUST BE RECOGNISEDIN GOVERNMENT POLICIES, INCLUDING FROM THESTRATEGIC VIEWPOINT, AS AN AID TO OVERCOMINGTHE CRISIS AND MOVING TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLEPRODUCTION MODEL

Decisions regarding biodiversity and natural resourcesplanning and maintenance have traditionally been

BIODIVER

SITY

IN SPAIN. THE BAS

IS FOR SUSTAINAB

ILITY IN THE FA

CE OF GLO

BAL

CHAN

GE

49

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN SPAIN

based on considerations most of which were determi-ned by cost-benefit analyses that failed to include (andstill do not include) the full economic value of biodiver-sity or the ecosystem services it provides.

Biodiversity will continue to be destroyed unless it isaccepted that it has significant value and is necessaryfor human well-being, and that the measures taken tomanage it must be researched prior to any intervention.What is more, in the face of the biodiversity crisis, res-ponse systems must be put in place that will enableprogress to be made in managing ecosystems and ren-dering them more functional.

Economic valuation is therefore a key management toolmaking it possible to recover the value of biodiversityand put it at the service of informed decision-making.Economic valuation must take into account non-marketvalues quantified according to the functions ecosystemsprovide, thereby creating incentives to conserve them.

Biodiversity can form part of a strategic approach to fin-ding a better way out of the crisis and mechanisms forachieving greater territorial cohesion and more sustai-nable rural development. In this connection, introducingmechanisms that put a value on natural assets andusing economic incentives to internalise positive exter-nalities –such as payment for environmental services,aimed at actively protecting and conserving theseassets, stewardship of the territory, land managementagreements and agro-environmental grants- constitutea set of economic devices for achieving rural develop-ment and sustainable management of the territory.

8. SUSTAINABILITY POLICIES, SUCH AS REDUCING CONSUMPTION OF MATERIALS AND RESOURCES, WILL EASE THE PRESSURE ON BIODIVERSITY AND IMPROVE GOVERNANCEMECHANISMS

It is essential to enhance efficiency and security in theuse of resources, for example by employing long life-cycle approaches that reflect all the environmentalimpacts of products and activities. Setting prices so theytake the impact of resource use into account will be animportant way of guiding the behaviour of companiesand consumers in the direction of greater efficiency inthe use of resources.

It is also necessary to create public-private partners-hips that allow the business community to make a sig-nificant contribution to halting biodiversity loss and tomake institutional agreements that clarify the functionsand responsibilities of all the actors involved.

More open and active participation by the economicagents, governments and citizens, in particular the peo-

ple nearest to the resources that are to be protected, iscrucial to sustainable management of natural capital.

Information must be generated that is specifically aimedat the needs of each social group. Similarly, an effort mustbe made to ensure that information campaigns are notonly about certain emblematic groups of species andhabitats, but take into account all the key factors formaintaining biodiversity as well as the interactions betwe-en ecological, economic and social processes.

9. NATURAL CAPITAL AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ACCOUNTING

The need to develop integrated environmental and econo-mic accounting as proposed by the United Nations and theEuropean Commission must not be confined to physicalemission and materials flow accounts, but must encom-pass global heritage, in particular changes in naturalresources.

As the European Commission has said, a new challenge indeveloping environmental accounting is to complement thephysical environmental accounts with monetary data basedon the valuation of the damage caused or avoided, changesin natural resources and changes in ecosystem goods andservices, in order to obtain representative, robust, compa-rable and reliable information. Monetary valuation of thecost of environmental damage and the advantages of pro-tecting the environment may help to focus political debateon the extent to which our prosperity and well-beingdepend on the goods and services provided by nature as keyelements for a sustainable development model.

10. IMPROVING THE KNOWLEDGE BASE TO ACCURATELY ASSESS THE CHANGES BEING PRODUCED BY ANTHROPIC PRESSURES ON DIVERSITY AND PLAN PROACTIVE AND ADAPTIVE ACTIONS

To do this, all available technical and scientific capaci-ties have to be mobilised by setting up interdisciplinaryteams and incorporating existing knowledge into politi-cal decision-making processes. The exchange of infor-mation, and systems for compiling, coordinating andaccessing up-to-date, relevant information, are vital.

This means that a coherent and accurate system of indi-cators must be put in place that will provide reliabletemporal information on the evolution of human activi-ties, our society’s cultural, sociological and economicresponse, and their repercussions on the environment,species and ecosystem processes. This system of indi-cators must be aimed at identifying strategies and mea-sures to halt biodiversity loss, propose proactive actionsand adaptive management mechanisms, and assess theresults and effectiveness of the policies adopted.

The

basi

sfo

r susta

inability

inth

efa

ceof

gl

obal change

BIO

DIVERSITY

INSP

AIN

The eighth OSE thematic report examines the status and trends of biodiversity in Spain, considering theincreasing importance of biodiversity as a basis for sustainability in the face of global change. The reportalso describes the main causes of the loss of biodiversity in this country and proposes a number ofresponse mechanisms necessary for its conservation and sustainable use.

The declaration of 2010 as International Biodiversity Year has highlighted the importance of conservationand sustainable use of biodiversity for present and future societies. In the coming years, protecting itwill become an essential matter for the survival of humanity, so that investing in our natural capital willmean long-term savings, reinforcing the positive feedback between biodiversity, ecosystems servicesand human welfare.

Spain is the country with the greatest biological wealth on the European continent and, just like the restof the world, it is suffering a pronounced loss of biodiversity. The report stresses the need to strengthenthe response mechanisms so that the conservation of biodiversity stimulates sustainability processes,with special emphasis on better planning and management taking into account climate change and thetransformations of the territory, and an appropriate valuation of the natural heritage with a view to raisingawareness of the fact that our prosperity (and the indicators that measure it, over and above GDP)depends on bringing out the value of ecosystem services as an essential part of a new model of sustainabledevelopment.

This report is a source of verified and reliable information the purpose of which is to inform society andhelp those responsible for decision-making to define sustainable development policies and strategiesfirmly grounded in the sustainable use of the heritage wealth that is biodiversity.

BIO

DIV

ER

SITY

IN S

PA

INB

ase

de la

sos

teni

bilid

ad a

nte

el c

ambi

o gl

obal

GEN

ERAL

SUMMARY