All EU Member States face economic and ecological losses due to forest damages. Thus, combating forest dieback, as for example caused by the effects of climate change, is a contribution to human safety and well-being and the sustainable development of Europe. At the EU level several efficient and well established policy instruments are developed and implemented, which contribute to the prevention, mitigation and control of forest dieback. The most important EU instruments in this context are the Rural Development Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999, replaced by the Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005) and the Forest Focus Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003, expired in 2006). The article reviews main EU policy and financial instruments and evaluates the feasibility of combating various causes of forest dieback in Europe.
Cooperation and support for sustainable forestry is part of the EU Forestry Strategy (1998; Council Resolution of 15th of December 1998 on a Forestry Strategy for the European Union - 1999/C 56/01) and the EU Forest Action Plan (2007-2011; COM (2006) 302 final: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 15 June 2006 on an EU Forest Action Plan - see
In order to meet the aim of managing forests sustainably the health and vitality of forests is of high relevance. Forest health and vitality serves as an indicator for negative environmental impacts, which can in turn affect human welfare and the quality of life (
In order to effectively combat forest dieback in the EU, the magnitude and causes of forest dieback need to be assessed, efficient and coherent measures and strategies developed and implemented at both the community and national levels.
A feasibility study on “Means of combating forest dieback in the European Union” was initiated by the European Parliament demanding the European Commission to investigate the development of concrete proposals for preventing, mitigating and control forest dieback in the EU. The study was carried out by the Institute for World Forestry (Hamburg) and the European Forest Institute (Joensuu) in 2007 (
review different factors affecting forest dieback in the EU and their related causes,
analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of available EU legislations and instruments to combat forest dieback in the EU and
examine the possibilities for establishing a specialised entity for forest protection.
The primary task of the feasibility study was to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of relevant EU legislations and instruments towards combating forest dieback in the EU. Most relevant EU instruments were analysed on how they address specific damaging agents and threats to forests in terms of
In addition to a comprehensive literature review on forest condition and the different causes of forest dieback in Europe, a survey was conducted in the EU Member States investigating the significance of damaging agents in EU27 forests. The results of the survey are summarised in
Nevertheless, the results of
The responsibility for forestry policy lies within the EU Member States. Within the EU many horizontal and issue-driven policy initiatives that directly or indirectly have impact on the forest sector are developed. These influence national forest policies and actions and vice versa. Although the EU does not have competences in forestry policy - the Treaty establishing the European Community makes no provision for a specific common forestry policy - there have been several actions and instruments in place for which EU Member States are obliged to bring national forest policies in line with EU objectives.
Pursuant to the principle of subsidiarity and the concept of shared responsibility, the European Community contributes to the implementation of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) and to the multifunctional role of forests (
non-binding
binding
At EU level several efficient and well established measures have been implemented which contribute to the prevention, mitigation and control of forest dieback as shown by
EU forest related actions are based on the principles as laid down in the EU Forestry Strategy (1998) and the EU Forest Action Plan (2007-2011). With respect to forest damages, the EU Forest Strategy specifically emphasises the need to improve the protection of the Community’s forests against atmospheric pollution and against fire. With the principles of the Forestry Strategy still being valid, the Forest Action Plan emphasis the objective of combating forest dieback specifically in its Key Action 9: “Enhance the protection of forests”. Further relevant Key Actions in that context are: Key action 6: “Facilitate EU compliance with the obligations on climate change mitigation of the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol and encourage adaptation to the effects of climate change”; Key action 7: “Contribute towards achieving the revised Community biodiversity objectives for 2010 and beyond”; Key action 8: “Work towards a European Forest Monitoring System”.
The most important EU instrument for combating forest dieback is the Rural Development Regulation and its financial support by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). These instruments provide support for several prevention and mitigation measures which facilitate towards improving forest stability and forest restoration. The current Rural Development policy is built around a competitiveness axis for agriculture, food and forestry, a land management-environment axis and a quality of life/diversification axis in rural areas. Forestry measures with respect to protection and rehabilitation are part of Axis 2:
Highly relevant instrument for combating forest dieback has been the expired Forest Focus Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003). It supported the implementation of forest condition monitoring and forest protection measures against fires during 2003-2006. The new LIFE+ programme (2007-2013) replaces earlier LIFE programmes and the expired Forest Focus Regulation. In principle the scope of the former Forest Focus Regulation activities are incorporated in LIFE+, although it does not provide secured co-financing as in the case of forest condition monitoring under Forest Focus. The monitoring of forest condition as conducted by the joint monitoring programme of ICP Forests/Forest Focus in 2003-2006 or by the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) was regarded by the survey respondents as indispensable to control and detect negative impacts of forest dieback in the short and long term. Collected and evaluated information provides a sound basis for developing and implementing adequate prevention and mitigation measures at different scales. A continuous financial support for harmonised data collection assessing the different cause-effects of forest dieback was seen crucial for maintaining but also improving current forest monitoring systems.
In case of natural disasters, which include large scale forest fires, storms or floods, instruments such as the EU Solidarity Fund (Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002) and the Civil Protection Mechanism (Council Decision 2001/792) are becoming increasingly relevant for the provision of fast, effective and flexible emergency financial aid.
In addition to these rather national or regionally focused measures the European Commission actively participates in the international forest regime and in the implementation of various commitments which are relevant to the maintenance of forest ecosystem health and vitality (EU and the International Forest Regime - see: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/fore/various/international_en.htm). The role of the EU to influence, support and implement international commitments and resolutions as formulated by global processes (
From the perspective of different causes of forest dieback it can be concluded that not all damaging agents can be targeted equally by EU measures.
There are several EU activities ongoing targeting towards mitigating and combating climate change and its effects at different scales. With respect to European forests, challenges are seen in incorporating the different cause-effects of climate change on forest health and vitality into effective instruments and measures. Future risks for forest ecosystem health and vitality caused by climate change are considered only to a minor extent in forest management programmes. Future instruments will need to embrace more strongly mitigation and control measures besides already existing prevention activities.
For
The EU forest related policy has only limited possibilities of support in terms of prevention and mitigation measures when it comes to impacts of
According to the MCPFE (
According to the
At the EU level several efficient and well established measures are already developed and implemented, which contribute to the prevention, mitigation and control of forest dieback. In the wake of current and the predicted development of environmental pressures, in particularly that of climate change, swift actions will become necessary at EU level in order to combat forest dieback and its repercussions effectively. One major challenge will be to incorporate future patterns of forest dieback, into existing, amended or new measures. Therefore existing measures will need to be revisited and in cases further developed in order to:
increase synergy effects between individual instruments,
make the instruments more transparent to the full range of potential stakeholders and beneficiaries, and
improve the communication between the different actors involved.
Additional measures may become necessary to support or enhance existing ones, whereas overlaps with well established and implemented measures should be minimised. Only a well coordinated and balanced set of measures addressing the prevention, mitigation and control of the multiple causes of forest dieback at different scales will allow to strengthen the EU in maintaining and enhancing the multiple, beneficial functions of forests and their contribution to the quality of life.
The authors especially like to thank Gerben Janse (EFI), Robert Mavsar (EFI), Markku Husso (EFI), Jutta Poker (Hamburg) and Thomas W. Schneider (Institute for World Forestry) for their tremendous input to this study. They would also like to thank Ernst Schulte and Zoltan Rakonczay from DG ENV for their valuable advice and assistance, thus allowing implementing the study “Means of combating forest dieback in the European Union” successfully. Furthermore the authors’ thanks goes to the members of the Standing Forestry Committee (SFC) and the Advisory Group on Forestry and Cork (AGFC) for their interest, input and feedback.
Ranking of importance of main threats to forests in EU Member States (Outcome of an enquiry sent to the members of Standing Forestry Committee (SFC) 6/ 2007; replies from 22 countries). Legend: 1 = negligible; 2 = occasionally a problem at local scale; 3 = regularly a problem at local scale; 4 = regularly a problem at local scale, but with a tendency of large scale distribution; 5 = serious problem at large scale.
Damaging agent | EUROPE | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northern | Central | Western | Eastern | Southern | Total | |
Storm / windfall | 2.8 | 3.0 | 3.6 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 2.8 |
Snow / avalanches | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
Drought | 1.4 | 2.5 | 2.9 | 3.3 | 3.0 | 2.6 |
Insects | 3.4 | 3.8 | 3.1 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.3 |
Diseases | 3.2 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 2.7 | 2.2 | 2.6 |
Browsing | 3.4 | 2.5 | 3.0 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 2.7 |
Domestic animals | 1.0 | 2.3 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 2.4 | 1.7 |
Invasive species | 1.2 | 1.8 | 2.6 | 2.0 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
Inappropriate management | 1.2 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.3 | 3.0 | 1.7 |
Illegal logging | 1.4 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 2.7 | 1.2 | 1.5 |
Pollution | 1.2 | 2.0 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 2.0 |
Fire | 1.8 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 3.4 | 2.5 |
EU funds and their relevance for a protection strategy, described by the aspects
Financial instrument | Prevention | Mitigation | Control | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Monitoring | Management | |||
Cohesion Fund | - | x (pollution) | - | - |
European Regional Development Fund | x (natural risks)x (fire)x (pollution) | x (natural risks)x (fire)x (pollution) | - | x (natural risks)x (fire)x (pollution) |
European Union Solidarity Fund | - | x (fire)x (disasters) | - | - |
Life | x (fire) | - | x (pollution)x (fire) | - |
Civil Protection mechanism | x (disasters) | x (disasters) | - | - |
Forest Focus 2003-2006 | x (fire) | - | x (pollution) x (fire) | - |
Rural Development Regulation - Agri-Environmental Measures | x (natural hazards) x (fire) | - | - | - |
Rural Development Regulation - EAGGF | x (natural disasters)x (fire) | x (natural disasters)x (fire) | - | x (forest improvement)x (restoration) |
Rural Development Regulation - EAFRD | x (natural disasters)x (fire) | x (natural disasters)x (fire) | - | x (forest improvement)x (restoration) |
Definition of forest dieback
“Forest dieback” is expressed as an umbrella term, which incorporates agents of all kinds that negatively affect the health, vitality and biodiversity of forests. Damages can be caused by biotic and abiotic agents or their combination thus resulting in mortality, or a significant loss of vitality, productivity or value of trees and other components of the forest ecosystem (after
EU communications, directives and regulations cited
COM (2004) 621 final: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE+)
COM (2006) 302 final: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 15 June 2006 on an EU Forest Action Plan
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2355/2002 of 27 December 2002 amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 438/2001 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 as regards the management and control systems for assistance granted under the Structural Funds
Council 2004, Preventing Forest Fires - Report to Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs of the Council of Europe
Council Decision 89/367/EEC in May 1989 setting up a Standing Forestry Committee
Council Decision of 23 October 2001 establishing a Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance
Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds
Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations
Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds
Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF)
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 of 21 May 1992 establishing a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE)
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92 of 23 July 1992 on protection of the Community’s forests against fire (OJ L217, 31. 7. 1992)
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3528/86 of 17 November 1986 on the protection of the Community’s forests against atmospheric pollution
Council Resolution of 15th of December 1998 on a Forestry Strategy for the European Union (1999/C 56/01)
Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.
Regulation (EC) No 1655/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE)
Regulation (EC) No 1682/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 September 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 1655/2000 concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE)
Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 concerning monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the Community (Forest Focus)
Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE+)