GI concept & Pan Baltic Scope approach for testing it within the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GI concept & Pan Baltic Scope approach for testing it within the Baltic Sea

Anda Ruskule Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development Riga, 12 December 2018

www.panbalticscope.eu

EU Policy context

• The EU

U Bi Biodiversity S Str trate tegy’s t s target 2 2 requires that “by 2020, ecosystems and their services are maintained and enhanced by establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15% of degraded ecosystems.”

• The

he ac action 6 of

• f the

he Strategy is setting priorities to restore and promote the use

• f green infrastructure,
• EU

EU-wide s e strategy egy p promoting i g inves estments i in gr green een i infrastructure, adopted by EC in 2013

2

www.panbalticscope.eu

What is Green Infrastructure (GI)?

The EU Green Infrastructure Strategy (EC, 2013)

“Strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with

• ther environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide

range of ecosystem services. It incorporates green spaces (or blue if aquatic ecosystems are concerned) and other physical features in terrestrial (including coastal) and marine areas.”

Other definitions, e.g. by Vallecillo et al., 2018:

“GI planning is a policy tool that stands to improve human well-being through its environmental, social and economic values, based on the multi-functional use of ecosystems.”

3

Source: Vallecillo S et al., 2018. Spatial alternatives for Green Infrastructure planning across the EU: An ecosystem service perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 174:41-54

www.panbalticscope.eu

Objectives of the GI acitivity within the PanBaltic Scope project

• To outline a concept of marine “green infrastructure”
• To test the concept by utilizing available data
• To collect feedback from the HELCOM-VASAM MSP

WG and HELCOM State and Conservation group

4

www.panbalticscope.eu

Outline of the Pan Baltic Scope concept for mapping of marine GI

Marine GI is formed by a spatial network of ecologically valuable areas significant for:

• ecosystems’ health and resilience,
• biodiversity conservation and,
• multiple delivery of ES essential for human well-being.

5

Areas of high ecological value Areas providing multiple ecosystem services Green infrastructure map

www.panbalticscope.eu

Example of methodology for GI planning

• n EU scale (terrestrial areas)

6

Source: Liquete C. et al., 2015. Mapping green infrastructure based on ecosystem services and ecological networks: A Pan-European case study. Environnemental Science & Policy 54: 268–280

www.panbalticscope.eu

Theoretical example how the methodology could be applied in marine areas

7

www.panbalticscope.eu

8

Examples: Latvia

Mapping of ecologcal values

Species richness Annual algae coverage Perrannual algea coverage Ecologicaly significant species Area important for birds Fish spawnin g grounds Important fishing areas Alien species Proportional coverage of biotope

www.panbalticscope.eu

9

Examples: Latvia

Ecosystem service mapping

Eutrophication control: denitrification Storage of pollutants Filtration of nutrients by mussels Nursery sites for fish Eutrophication control: storage of nutrients Carbon storage

Sum of regulating services per grid cell

www.panbalticscope.eu

Example how the methodology could be applied in marine areas

10

Areas with highest scores for ecological value Areas with highest scores for ecosystem service supply

www.panbalticscope.eu

Proposed methodology and first results

11

www.panbalticscope.eu

Mapping of the areas of high ecologicl vale

12

1) Matrix developed, assessing HELCOM HOLAS II ecosystem components (in binary scale: 0/1) in relation to 7 criteria:

• biological diversity;
• rarity;
• importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats;
• vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery;
• special importance for life-history stages of species;
• biological productivity.

2) A hierarchical data aggregation method to avoid a domination of ecological features that are overrepresented within the HELCOM HOLAS II ecosystem components data set

• 21 map representing average value of each criteria in relation to each ecosystem

components (value normalized between 0 and 1)

• 4 aggregated ecological value maps for each group of ecological components -

habitats, birds, fish mammals (value normalized between 0 and 1)

• Overall aggregated ecological value map combining four groups of ecological

components (value normalized between 0 and 1)

www.panbalticscope.eu

Matrix for assessment of ecological value

Category HELCOM BSII Ecological Diversity Components Biodiversity Rarity Importance for threatened, species and/or habitats Vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity or slow recovery Special importance for life-history stages of species Biological productivity Benthic habitat Availability of deep water habitat, based on occurrence of H2S 1 Benthic habitat Infralittoral hard bottom 1 Benthic habitat Infralittoral sand 1 Benthic habitat Infralittoral mud 1 Benthic habitat Infralittoral mixed 1 Benthic habitat Circalittoral hard bottom 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Circalittoral sand 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Circalittoral mud 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Circalittoral mixed 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water at all time (1110) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Estuaries (1130) 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide (1140) 1 Benthic habitat Coastal lagoons (1150) 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Large shallow inlets and bays (1160) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Reefs (1170) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Submarine structures made by leaking gas (1180) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Baltic Esker Islands (UW parts, 1610) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Benthic habitat Boreal Baltic islets and small islands (UW parts, 1620) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Habitat building species Furcellaria lumbricalis 1 1 1 1 1 1 Habitat building species Zostera marina 1 1 1 1 1 1 Habitat building species Charophytes 1 1 1 1 1 1 Habitat building species Mytilus sp. 1 1 1 (0) 1 1 1 Habitat building species Fucus sp. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pelagic habitat Productive surface waters 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Cod abundance 1 1 Fish Cod spawning area 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Herring abundance 1 Fish Sprat abundance 1 Fish Recruitment areas of perch 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Recruitment areas of pikeperch 1 1 1 1 1 Bird Wintering seabirds 1 1 1 1 1 Bird Breeding seabird colonies 1 1 1 1 1 Mamal Grey seal distribution Mamal Harbour seal distribution Mamal Ringed seal distribution 1 1 1 1 Mamal Distribution of harbour porpoise 1 1 1 1

www.panbalticscope.eu

Areas of high ecologicl vale: Habitats

14

Aggregated value map: habitats

Biological diversity Biological productivity Importance for threated species Rarity Importance for life- history stages Vulnerability

www.panbalticscope.eu

Areas of high ecologicl vale: Fish

15

Aggregated value map: fish

Biological diversity Biological productivity Importance for threated species Rarity Importance for life- history stages Vulnerability

www.panbalticscope.eu

Areas of high ecologicl vale: Birds

16

Aggregated value map: birds

Biological diversity Importance for threated species Rarity Importance for life- history stages Vulnerability

www.panbalticscope.eu

Areas of high ecologicl vale: mammals

17

Aggregated value map: mammals

Biological diversity Importance for threated species Rarity Vulnerability

www.panbalticscope.eu

Overall aggregated ecological value map combining four groups of ecological components

18

Possibilities to improve the data sets

• Fish maps replaced with mapping results
• f EFH group
• Improving mammals data set
• r
• Excluding mammals and birds

www.panbalticscope.eu

What could be fasible approach for ecosystem service mapping?

Using expert knowledge and published studies on biophysical processes underping ES supply (spatial proxy methods):

• Benthic habitat/sediment maps as proxy for service supply;
• Spread sheed approach – interlinking habitats/ecological components

with capacity to supply ES

• Selection of ES: regulating & maintanace services
• Selection of indicators for ES assessment
• Semi-quantitative (relative scale) or qualitative assessment (yes/no)
• Agregation of ES value per grid cell

19

www.panbalticscope.eu Provisioning services

Wild plants, algae and their outputs

Area covered by red algae Furcellaria lumbricalis

Wild animals and their outputs

Total catch of commercially important fish species Bio-remediation Filtration/sequestration/storage/ accumulation Maintaining nursery populations and habitats Regulation of chemical composition of atmosphere and oceans

Cultural services

Physical and experiential interactions Marine tourism and leisure possibilities at the coastal areas

Regulating services

Storage of nutrients and pollutants Carbon sequestration by zostera nursery sites for fish species Filtration of nutrients by mussels

Identification of ecosystem services (CICES V5.1)

Control of erosion Hydrological cycle and water flow regulation (Including coastal protection) Pollination, seed dispersal Regulation of the chemical condition of salt waters by living processes Pest control Shape of underwater slope; Stone/reefs, macrophytes, islands abundance of piscivorous; food web integrity biomass/amount of macroalgae

www.panbalticscope.eu

Next steps

• Finalsiation mapping of maps on high ecological value
• Assesment of ES supply potential by ecosytem components
• Maps of sigle ecosystem services
• Development of agregated ES map
• Multi-variable analysis of ecosystem services in relation to

different ecosystem components, detecting ES bundles???

• Development of agregated GI map by combining ecological and

ES value

• Potentially GI map should reflect functional heterogeneity
• f marine areas

21

THANK YOU!

www.panbalticscope.eu