The Fitness Check of the Birds and Habitats Directives: A discourse analysis of stakeholders' perspectives

Francesca Ferranti*, Raoul Beunen, Pau Vericat, Maria Geitzenauer

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In 2015, the European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives underwent an evaluation in which selected national stakeholders provided their perspectives on the directives' implementation. Analyzing the views of different stakeholder groups from eight European member states, this study found that these views could be synthesized into three more general perspectives. The first perspective focuses on problems, indicating that these are caused by legislative drawbacks in the directives. The second perspective holds that problems are generated by improper implementation by member states. The third perspective commends the benefits of the directives in face of the existing implementation problems. Interest groups and to a minor extent governmental bodies espoused the first perspective, and environmental non-governmental organizations especially favored the third. The struggle between these three perspectives reflects ongoing debates regarding positive and negative aspects of the directives and possibilities for improving their implementation. We conclude that the relevance and impact of conservation policies should never be seen as self-evident. In order to reach the conservation goals envisaged, continuous efforts are needed to enforce and maintain environmental legislation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)103-109
Number of pages7
JournalJournal for Nature Conservation
Volume47
Early online date16 Nov 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2019

Keywords

  • European Union
  • Biodiversity policy
  • Natura 2000
  • Implementation experiences
  • Bottom-up dynamics
  • EUROPEAN-UNION
  • NATURA 2000
  • CONSERVATION
  • POLICY
  • IMPLEMENTATION
  • BIODIVERSITY
  • STRATEGIES
  • GOVERNANCE

Cite this

@article{653841fdfd8e43a7b17c88f9d3c09237,
title = "The Fitness Check of the Birds and Habitats Directives: A discourse analysis of stakeholders' perspectives",
abstract = "In 2015, the European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives underwent an evaluation in which selected national stakeholders provided their perspectives on the directives' implementation. Analyzing the views of different stakeholder groups from eight European member states, this study found that these views could be synthesized into three more general perspectives. The first perspective focuses on problems, indicating that these are caused by legislative drawbacks in the directives. The second perspective holds that problems are generated by improper implementation by member states. The third perspective commends the benefits of the directives in face of the existing implementation problems. Interest groups and to a minor extent governmental bodies espoused the first perspective, and environmental non-governmental organizations especially favored the third. The struggle between these three perspectives reflects ongoing debates regarding positive and negative aspects of the directives and possibilities for improving their implementation. We conclude that the relevance and impact of conservation policies should never be seen as self-evident. In order to reach the conservation goals envisaged, continuous efforts are needed to enforce and maintain environmental legislation.",
keywords = "European Union, Biodiversity policy, Natura 2000, Implementation experiences, Bottom-up dynamics, EUROPEAN-UNION, NATURA 2000, CONSERVATION, POLICY, IMPLEMENTATION, BIODIVERSITY, STRATEGIES, GOVERNANCE",
author = "Francesca Ferranti and Raoul Beunen and Pau Vericat and Maria Geitzenauer",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.jnc.2018.11.004",
language = "English",
volume = "47",
pages = "103--109",
journal = "Journal for Nature Conservation",
issn = "1617-1381",
publisher = "Elsevier GmbH - Urban und Fischer",

}

The Fitness Check of the Birds and Habitats Directives : A discourse analysis of stakeholders' perspectives. / Ferranti, Francesca; Beunen, Raoul; Vericat, Pau; Geitzenauer, Maria.

In: Journal for Nature Conservation, Vol. 47, 02.2019, p. 103-109.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Fitness Check of the Birds and Habitats Directives

T2 - A discourse analysis of stakeholders' perspectives

AU - Ferranti, Francesca

AU - Beunen, Raoul

AU - Vericat, Pau

AU - Geitzenauer, Maria

PY - 2019/2

Y1 - 2019/2

N2 - In 2015, the European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives underwent an evaluation in which selected national stakeholders provided their perspectives on the directives' implementation. Analyzing the views of different stakeholder groups from eight European member states, this study found that these views could be synthesized into three more general perspectives. The first perspective focuses on problems, indicating that these are caused by legislative drawbacks in the directives. The second perspective holds that problems are generated by improper implementation by member states. The third perspective commends the benefits of the directives in face of the existing implementation problems. Interest groups and to a minor extent governmental bodies espoused the first perspective, and environmental non-governmental organizations especially favored the third. The struggle between these three perspectives reflects ongoing debates regarding positive and negative aspects of the directives and possibilities for improving their implementation. We conclude that the relevance and impact of conservation policies should never be seen as self-evident. In order to reach the conservation goals envisaged, continuous efforts are needed to enforce and maintain environmental legislation.

AB - In 2015, the European Union's Birds and Habitats Directives underwent an evaluation in which selected national stakeholders provided their perspectives on the directives' implementation. Analyzing the views of different stakeholder groups from eight European member states, this study found that these views could be synthesized into three more general perspectives. The first perspective focuses on problems, indicating that these are caused by legislative drawbacks in the directives. The second perspective holds that problems are generated by improper implementation by member states. The third perspective commends the benefits of the directives in face of the existing implementation problems. Interest groups and to a minor extent governmental bodies espoused the first perspective, and environmental non-governmental organizations especially favored the third. The struggle between these three perspectives reflects ongoing debates regarding positive and negative aspects of the directives and possibilities for improving their implementation. We conclude that the relevance and impact of conservation policies should never be seen as self-evident. In order to reach the conservation goals envisaged, continuous efforts are needed to enforce and maintain environmental legislation.

KW - European Union

KW - Biodiversity policy

KW - Natura 2000

KW - Implementation experiences

KW - Bottom-up dynamics

KW - EUROPEAN-UNION

KW - NATURA 2000

KW - CONSERVATION

KW - POLICY

KW - IMPLEMENTATION

KW - BIODIVERSITY

KW - STRATEGIES

KW - GOVERNANCE

U2 - 10.1016/j.jnc.2018.11.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jnc.2018.11.004

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 103

EP - 109

JO - Journal for Nature Conservation

JF - Journal for Nature Conservation

SN - 1617-1381

ER -