Forest and Natural Conservation Policy in Europe

In some regions, the legislations are combined with natural resource management and land planning to ensure sustainable development (Sunyer and Manteiga 2008). Spain has a great diversity of ecosystems from Alpine to Mediterranean regions which made the country become one of the great biodiversity regions in Europe (EC 2003 and Ecologistas en Acción 2008). As a result, the issues related to nature conservation also arise at the same time (Ecologistas en Acción 2008).

To response to the issues, the development of nature conservation policies were made in 2007 and those policies were based on the 1989 Nature Conservation Act (Sunyer and Manteiga 2008). Furthermore, many regional governments have taken into account the Natura 2000 initiative when developing the legislation on environmental and natural protection (EC 2003). However, most nature conservation policies in Spain did not take ecological network into account yet (Sunyer and Manteiga 2008).

For instant, few patches inside El Montseny Natural Park in Barcelona and Girona sector have been designated for Natura 2000 areas (Carlos Colinas, pers.comm, May 4, 2009). Furthermore, the management plan of the park has been established through participation of park authorities, land owners and some other relevant stakeholders. In Alinya (Mountain Reserve in Pyrenees), reintroduction program of black vultures (Aegipyus monachus) has been done to protect and increase the population of the species. Additionally, breeding program has also been introduced to produce more chicks for reintroduction. Ecological Connectivity Corridor has been established between France and Spain to enhance international collaboration for black vulture conservation program in Europe (Frederic Casals, pers.comm, May 7, 2009).

2. France

The forest area in France has increased up to 28.6% or 15.71 million hectares of the total metropolitan territory (IFN 2008). To ensure sustainable management of the forest resource, the establishments of legal framework need to be done. Consequently, the development of National Forest Program has been carried out since 2004 by involving all stakeholders and this program will be integrated with national forest biodiversity action plan in the future (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 2005 ). Reforestation program has also been included in its policy in order to rehabilitate the degraded mountain land and abandoned agricultural land (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 2005 and IFN 2008). However, the French forest policy has gone through a long way of reform and forest law was enacted in June 2001 but come into implementation in July 2002 (Chandra Poudel 2006). After the first Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, France started to implement the first related forest conservation policy for forest genetic resource and the main species for this program are beech, silver fir, sessile oak and some other species (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 2005). Since France is the European Union member, the nature conservation policies have to comply with legal framework at European level especially the bird and habitat directive. In addition, the Natura 2000 network is one of the most well known initiatives among the member states. In France, Natura 2000 network has been created to protect biodiversity and currently 201 sites have been designated for special protection areas and 1 226 sites have been proposed for classification in compliance with the two directives (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 2005).

The regional natural park in Orient, Champagne, is example of nature conservation in France. This site has been included in Ramsar Convention due to the complex of pond, lakes, flooded forest and meadows (Annick Genet, pers.comm, May 14, 2009). It is very interesting to know

that some ponds are man mad or artificial built. However, the area offers habitats to more than 2000 waterbirds of endanger and rare species such as black stork, purple heron, and bean goose (Minister for Ecology and Sustainable Development 2005). Even though the area has not been designated for Natura 2000 network, it has been partly financed by European Union (Annick Genet, pers.comm, May 14, 2009).

3. Germany

Germany is a federal state and in 1975, the Federal Forest Act, which based on two different constitutions, was developed (Roering 2004). The purposes of the act are to conserve forests due to their economic benefits, to promote forestry and to bring about a balance between the interests of the general public and the interests of the forest owners (Roering 2004). Black forest is a good example of multi-functional use of forest especially for public interest in a form of recreation in Germany. Black forest is not only the place for recreation but it is also the research station for scientist to understand the forest growth and some impacts of climate change on this forest. In addition, the development of National Forest Program (NFP) has been carried out since 1999 through public participation from federal ministries and state forest agencies as well as non-governmental organizations (Peter 2007).

The legislations of nature conservation and landscape protection are not separated and states or local authorities have to implement them. The Federal Conservation Act plays an important role in offering national framework for nature conservation and additionally, it was amended in 2002 (Nationale Naturalandschaften 2008). Nature conservation areas have also been defined in the act and the regional governments are responsible for designation of the areas (BfN n.d.). According to the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), the average size of the area is 152.6 hectares but in reality, about 60 percents of nature conservation areas are less than 50 hectares and fore example in the states such as Saarland, Rhineland-Palatinate, North Rhine-Westphalia, Hesse, Berlin and Baden-Württemberg. At European level, Germany has designated 14.1% it territories for Natura 2000 network (BfN 2008). German nature conservation policy has been influenced by some international conventions such as Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) guideline for protected area management and some other relevant international laws and agreements (Nationale Naturalandschaften 2008).

For instant, Rhine valley is located in France and Germany. Floodplain forest in Rhine valley has been designated as the Natura 2000 area and remarkably, Rhine is the longest river in Germany (Heinrich Spiecker, pers.comm, May 26, 2009). The forest is a mixed broadleaf forest with oak, cherry, popular, ash and alder. However, this floodplain forest plays vital role in nature conservation and landscape value in Germany.

4. The Netherlands

In the Netherland, the first forest policy was established in 1917 and the first forest law were passed in 1922 (Schmidt 2003). Lately, Landscape act were enacted to ensure aesthetic and recreational values of the forests (Schmidt 2003). The forest sector was considered less important since forests covered only 10% of country (Veenman 2009). Since the 1950s, the forestry sector has significantly changed due to shift from timber production toward nature conservation (Schmidt 2003).

This change has been accompanied by three important issues:

(1) Changing role of forestry in land-use

Due to the growth of demand for recreation, the rural areas are used for landscape and nature conservation. In this case, the forestry needs to be integrated with other sectors like agriculture and tourism to meet the need of social demand. For instance, the Hoge Veluwe National Park is one of the famous parks of the Netherlands. The park is combined different landscapes from woodland to grassland and driftsand scenery. The park receives many tourists who interested in nature recreation (Jim Van Laar, pers.comm, May 31, 2009). (2) A diversification in fulfillment of forest functions

Forest functions are much diversified in the Netherlands and consequently, the public perceptions have been taken into account in forest policy development and management plan. Forest was considered as the part of nature so it needs to fulfill the multipurpose use of the society.

(3) The development of interactive policy making

The involvement of policy making is changing from professional expertise based to multitude participation of all stakeholders. Policy process is also encouraging the interaction between policy makers, forest authorities at various level, forest owners and other interest groups. Thus, all the stakeholder need to work hand in hand in order to balance the need and ensure sustainability of forest management in the Netherlands. For example, in Utrechtse Heuvelrug National Park where is belonged to multitude owners, the management is implemented by various land owners (Linde Kuyf, pers.comm, June 3, 2009).

In 2002, Nature for people and people for nature program was launched to ensure sustainable use of nature and landscape and it was considered as the major policy document in the Netherlands (Schmidt 2003).

II. Forest and Nature Conservation Policy

1. Comparative analysis between Spain and the Netherlands

In Spain, the forest policy is mainly based on the conservation forest and reforestation. However, the forest policy of Spain is quite different from the Netherlands because the forest policy was integrated with land planning policy. In addition, the policy is still under development. The nature conservation law of Spain is not sufficient for fulfillment of European Nature Conservation law (Ecologistas en Acción, 2008). Furthermore, according to Sunyer and Manteiga (2008) most nature conservation policies in Spain did not take into account the ecological network concept. Unlike Spain, the Dutch government has a well established policy which based on European Bird and Habitat Directive such as Natura 2000 and National Ecological Network. Furthermore, subsidiaries are provided for nature conservation and public recreation by the Dutch government while in Spain, the subsidiaries scheme seems not to be clear yet. Noticeably, the Netherlands tends to manage forest for nature conservation rather than production function.

2. Comparative analysis between France and Germany

Germany and France have the same structure of ownership and production function of forest is mainly concerned for both states but it not always the primary aim to all forest (EC 2003). In addition, both sates are trying to develop their nature conservation policy based on the birds and habitat directive of European Commission especially Natura 2000 initiative. According to the report of The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, the national forest program of Germany seems to move ahead compare to France. In Germany, the national forest program is in the implement and evaluation stage while in France, the national forest program is in the formulation stage (MCPFE 2005). However, in France the forest genetic conservation is more concerned compare to Germany. The nature conservation policy is well established compare to France and for example Federal Conservation Act has been enacted since 1975.

To make the comparison easier to understand, the forest policy analysis and nature conservation framework have been formed to perform comprehensive analysis of the four countries.

Quotation criteria:

-Nothing * Something residual ** Something exists *** Something consistent

Nature Conservation Legal Framework

* Source: EC 2003

In conclusion, the forest and nature conservation policy adopted by the four states have showed different integration to other related policies. In practice, the forest and nature conservation policy would not work smoothly without combination with other policies like agriculture, land use, tourism, and environment. The future trend of forest and nature conservation policy seems to regulate according to the ecological, economical and social perspectives of these countries.

References

BfN (German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation), 2008. Natura 2000 in Germany.

Available at: www.bfn.de

Chandra Poudel, B., 2006. A Report on European Field Course.  Masters in European Forestry (MSc EF) University of Joensuu , Joensuu, Finland

Dhume, F. et al., 1997.Quantifying targets for nature conservation in future European landscapes. Landscape znd Urban Planmng 37, :73-84

EC (European Commission), 2003. Natura 2000 and forests ‘Challenges and opportunities’ Interpretation Guide

Ecologistas en Acción, 2008. Evaluation of the state of nature conservation in Spain

EEA (European Environmental Agency), 2005. Sustainable use and management of natural resources. No 9/2005, : 46

IFN (Inventaire Forestier National = National Forest Inventory), 2008.The French forest figures and maps

Keulartz, J. and Leistra, G. (eds.), 2008.Legitimacy in European Nature Conservation Policy: Case Studies in Multilevel Governance, :3-21

MCPFE (The Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe), 2005. National Forest Programes in Europe

Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, 2005. Indicators for the sustainable management of French forests

Minister for Ecology and Sustainable Development, 2005. Wetlands of International Importance in France

Montiel, C. and Galiana, L., 2005. Forest policy and land planning policy in Spain: a regional approach. Forest Policy and Economics 7, : 131- 142

Nationale Naturalandschaften, 2008. Developing a procedure to evaluate management effectiveness: Quality criteria and standards for German national parks

Peter, E., 2007. Do “stakeholders” represent citizen interests? An empirical inquiry into assessments of policy aims in the National Forest Programme for Germany. Forest Policy and Economics 9, : 1018-1030

Schmidt, P., Kuiler, E., etl., 2003. The Netherlands. Forest and Nature Policy Group, Wageningen University

Sunyer, C. and Manteiga, L., 2008. SPEN - Interactions between Policy Concerning Spatial Planning and Ecological Networks in Europe: Country Study for Spain. Environmental Policy Center

Roering, H.-W., 2004. Study on Forestry in Germany. Arbeitsbericht des Instituts für Forstökonomie der BFH Hamburg 2004/16. 21 pp.

Veernman, S., Liefferin, D. and Arts, B., 2009. A short history of Dutch forest policy: The ‘de-institutionalisation of a policy arrangement. Forest Policy and Economics 11, : 202-208