Natura 2000 management plans in France and the Netherlands

Carrots, sticks, sermons and different problems

Irene Bouwma, R. Beunen, Duncan Liefferink

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

8 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Many EU Member States are using management plans to ensure the sustainable conservation and management of Natura 2000 sites. The decision about whether to use management plans lies with the Member States. Although management planning systems differ, in most countries the management plan is developed at local level in close consultation with relevant stakeholders. This article explores to what extent national decisions on the management planning system have influenced the content of the local plans. The comparison of French and Dutch Natura 2000 management plans shows that the plans mostly propose conservation measures that can be implemented by individual owners or users of the site and for which funding is available. The individual measures in the French plans reflect the national decision that the management plans should work primarily as a funding tool. The individual measures in the Dutch plans however do not reflect the national decision that management plans should act as a legislative tool to regulate land use activities in and around the site. In the Netherlands, the focus has shifted towards a tool for the coordination of funding. The analysis shows that in both countries the selection of particular measures in the management plans is connected to other policies and funding mechanisms that deal with the problems perceived by involved actors, such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Dutch National Programme for Nitrogen Deposition.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)56-65
Number of pages10
JournalJournal for Nature Conservation
Volume46
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2018

Fingerprint

planning system
Common Agricultural Policy
management plan
stakeholder
land use
decision
plan
nitrogen
analysis
comparison
co-ordination
consultation
policy
programme

Keywords

  • Nature management
  • Protected areas
  • Management planning
  • Natura 2000
  • Policy instruments
  • MEMBER STATES
  • BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
  • PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION
  • INSTRUMENT CHOICE
  • EUROPEAN-UNION
  • IMPLEMENTATION
  • HABITATS
  • POLICY
  • FRAMEWORK
  • NITROGEN

Cite this

@article{7031bc5e1efe49c1b0102fdec39ccab0,
title = "Natura 2000 management plans in France and the Netherlands: Carrots, sticks, sermons and different problems",
abstract = "Many EU Member States are using management plans to ensure the sustainable conservation and management of Natura 2000 sites. The decision about whether to use management plans lies with the Member States. Although management planning systems differ, in most countries the management plan is developed at local level in close consultation with relevant stakeholders. This article explores to what extent national decisions on the management planning system have influenced the content of the local plans. The comparison of French and Dutch Natura 2000 management plans shows that the plans mostly propose conservation measures that can be implemented by individual owners or users of the site and for which funding is available. The individual measures in the French plans reflect the national decision that the management plans should work primarily as a funding tool. The individual measures in the Dutch plans however do not reflect the national decision that management plans should act as a legislative tool to regulate land use activities in and around the site. In the Netherlands, the focus has shifted towards a tool for the coordination of funding. The analysis shows that in both countries the selection of particular measures in the management plans is connected to other policies and funding mechanisms that deal with the problems perceived by involved actors, such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Dutch National Programme for Nitrogen Deposition.",
keywords = "Nature management, Protected areas, Management planning, Natura 2000, Policy instruments, MEMBER STATES, BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION, PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION, INSTRUMENT CHOICE, EUROPEAN-UNION, IMPLEMENTATION, HABITATS, POLICY, FRAMEWORK, NITROGEN",
author = "Irene Bouwma and R. Beunen and Duncan Liefferink",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.jnc.2018.09.001",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "56--65",
journal = "Journal for Nature Conservation",
issn = "1617-1381",
publisher = "Elsevier GmbH - Urban und Fischer",

}

Natura 2000 management plans in France and the Netherlands : Carrots, sticks, sermons and different problems. / Bouwma, Irene; Beunen, R.; Liefferink, Duncan.

In: Journal for Nature Conservation, Vol. 46, 12.2018, p. 56-65.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Natura 2000 management plans in France and the Netherlands

T2 - Carrots, sticks, sermons and different problems

AU - Bouwma, Irene

AU - Beunen, R.

AU - Liefferink, Duncan

PY - 2018/12

Y1 - 2018/12

N2 - Many EU Member States are using management plans to ensure the sustainable conservation and management of Natura 2000 sites. The decision about whether to use management plans lies with the Member States. Although management planning systems differ, in most countries the management plan is developed at local level in close consultation with relevant stakeholders. This article explores to what extent national decisions on the management planning system have influenced the content of the local plans. The comparison of French and Dutch Natura 2000 management plans shows that the plans mostly propose conservation measures that can be implemented by individual owners or users of the site and for which funding is available. The individual measures in the French plans reflect the national decision that the management plans should work primarily as a funding tool. The individual measures in the Dutch plans however do not reflect the national decision that management plans should act as a legislative tool to regulate land use activities in and around the site. In the Netherlands, the focus has shifted towards a tool for the coordination of funding. The analysis shows that in both countries the selection of particular measures in the management plans is connected to other policies and funding mechanisms that deal with the problems perceived by involved actors, such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Dutch National Programme for Nitrogen Deposition.

AB - Many EU Member States are using management plans to ensure the sustainable conservation and management of Natura 2000 sites. The decision about whether to use management plans lies with the Member States. Although management planning systems differ, in most countries the management plan is developed at local level in close consultation with relevant stakeholders. This article explores to what extent national decisions on the management planning system have influenced the content of the local plans. The comparison of French and Dutch Natura 2000 management plans shows that the plans mostly propose conservation measures that can be implemented by individual owners or users of the site and for which funding is available. The individual measures in the French plans reflect the national decision that the management plans should work primarily as a funding tool. The individual measures in the Dutch plans however do not reflect the national decision that management plans should act as a legislative tool to regulate land use activities in and around the site. In the Netherlands, the focus has shifted towards a tool for the coordination of funding. The analysis shows that in both countries the selection of particular measures in the management plans is connected to other policies and funding mechanisms that deal with the problems perceived by involved actors, such as the Common Agricultural Policy and the Dutch National Programme for Nitrogen Deposition.

KW - Nature management

KW - Protected areas

KW - Management planning

KW - Natura 2000

KW - Policy instruments

KW - MEMBER STATES

KW - BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

KW - PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION

KW - INSTRUMENT CHOICE

KW - EUROPEAN-UNION

KW - IMPLEMENTATION

KW - HABITATS

KW - POLICY

KW - FRAMEWORK

KW - NITROGEN

U2 - 10.1016/j.jnc.2018.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.jnc.2018.09.001

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 56

EP - 65

JO - Journal for Nature Conservation

JF - Journal for Nature Conservation

SN - 1617-1381

ER -