Abstract
We performed a gap analysis of protected area networks in Italy to assess the representativeness of potential natural vegetation (PNV) types of the European Natura 2000 network compared with the National Protected Area network. In this context, the PNV map, reflecting the diversity and spatial arrangement of the natural terrestrial ecosystems, can be considered as an appropriate proxy of environmental and biogeographical diversity of Italy. In this country, 775 protected areas are registered in the Official List of Protected Areas (OLPA), 2281 sites are listed as Sites of Community Interest and 590 as Special Protection Areas, constituting the Natura 2000 network. The adopted conservation target considered that any PNV type included for less than the 10% in the PAs network (OLPA, Natura 2000) was defined as a gap in the system. In particular we defined four categories of PNV protection: any PNV types with a representation of less than 10% in both the OLPA and N2000 was defined as a “total gap” (i.e., under-protected); any PNV type with a representation of less than 10% in either the OLPA or the N2000 was defined as a “partial gap”; any PNV type with a representation of between 10 and 50% in both the OLPA and N2000 was defined as “protected”; lastly, any PNV type with a representation of more than 50% in both the OLPA and N2000 was defined as “widely-protected”. Digital overlays of PNV and PAs networks were separately performed and statistics produced, indicating the current state of protection of Potential Natural Vegetation types in the two networks (OLPA and Natura 2000). We found that more than 59% of PNV types recognized on the Italian territory is not protected by the OLPA network. On the contrary, regarding Natura 2000 network, 68% of PNV types are protected, accounting for 27% more than OLPA. Compared to the National network of OLPA, the European network Natura 2000 is characterized by a larger percentage of territory in terms of area (18% of the Italian territory for Natura 2000 vs 10% of OLPA) but also by a smaller size of the sites, allowing for a more coherent distribution and efficiency in the protection of habitat remnants (68% PNV types protected by Natura 2000 vs 41% by OLPA). The proposed PNV approach can help guiding decisions on where and how to spend scarce conservation management resources.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Abbreviations
- N2000:
-
European Natura 200 Network
- OLPA:
-
Official List of Protected Areas
- PNV:
-
Potential Natural Vegetation.
References
Blasi, C., M. L. Carranza, R. Frondoni and L. Rosati. 2000. Ecosystem classification and mapping: a proposal for Italian Land-scapes. App. Veg. Sci. 2:233–242.
Blasi, C., G. Filibeck, R. Frondoni, L. Rosati and D. Smiraglia. 2004. The map of the vegetation series of Italy. Fitosociologia 41:21–26.
Blasi, C. and L. Michetti. 2007. The climate of Italy. In: C. Blasi, L. Boitani, S. La Posta, F. Manes. and M. Marchetti (eds.), Biodiversity in Italy. Palombi Editori, Roma. pp. 58–66.
Bohn, U. and R. Neuhäusl. 2004. Map of the Natural Vegetation of Europe. Scale 1:2 500 000. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. Bonn, Germany.
Chefaoui, R.M., J. Hortal and J. M. Lobo. 2005. Potential distribution modelling, niche characterization and conservation status assessment using GIS tools: a case study of Iberian Copris species. Biol. Conserv. 122:327–338.
Chytrý, M. 1998. Potential replacement vegetation: an approach to vegetation mapping of cultural landscapes. App. Veg. Sci. 1:177–188.
Corona, P., A. Macrì and M. Marchetti. 2004. Boschi e foreste in Italia secondo le più recenti fonti informative. L’Italia forestale e montana 2:119–136.
del Río, S., A. Penas and R. Perez-Romero. 2005. Potential areas of deciduous forests in Spain (Castile and Leon) according to future climate change. Plant Biosyst. 139:222–233.
Dietz, R.W. and B. Czech. 2005. Conservation deficits for the continental United States: an ecosystem gap analysis. Conserv. Biol. 19:1478–1487.
Dimitrakopoulos, P G., D. Memtsas and A. Y. Troumbis. 2004. Questioning the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 special areas of conservation strategy: the case of Crete. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 13:199–207.
ESRI. 1999. ArcView 3.2 GIS software. Redlands, CA, USA.
Falcucci, A., L. Maiorano and L. Boitani. 2007. Changes in land-use/land-cover patterns in Italy and their implications for biodiversity conservation. Landsc. Ecol. 22:617–631.
Gallizia Vuerich, L., L. Poldini and E. Feoli. 2001. Model for the potential natural vegetation mapping of Friuli Venezia-Giulia (NE Italy) and its application for a biogeographic classification of the Region. Plant Biosyst. 135:319–335.
Humphrey, J.W. 2005. Benefits to biodiversity from developing oldgrowth conditions in British upland spruce plantations: A review and recommendations. Forestry 78:33–53.
Italian Ministry of the Environment - Politecnico di Milano. 2005. GIS NATURA: Il GIS delle conoscenze naturalistiche in Italia (DVD).
Jennings, M. D. 2000. Gap analysis: concepts, methods, and recent results. Landsc. Ecol. 15:5–20.
Lexer, M.J., K. Honninger, H. Scheifinger, Ch. Matulla, N. Groll, H. Kromp-Kolb, K. Schadauer, F. Starlinger and M. Englisch. 2002. The sensitivity of Austrian forests to scenarios of climatic change: a large-scale risk assessment based on a modified gap model and forest inventory data. Forest Ecol. Manage. 162:53–72.
Machado, A. 2004. An index of naturalness. J. Nature Conserv. 12:95 -110.
Maccherini, S., M. Marignani, P. Castagnini and P.J. van den Brink. 2007. Multivariate analysis of the response of overgrown seminatural calcareous grasslands to restorative shrub cutting. Basic App. Ecol. 8:332–342.
Maiorano, L., A. Falcucci and L. Boitani. 2006. Gap analysis of terrestrial vertebrates in Italy: Priorities for conservation planning in a human dominated landscape. Biol. Conserv. 133:455–473.
Margules, C.R. and R.L. Pressey. 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253.
Martinez, I., F. Carreno, A. Escudero and A. Rubio. 2006. Are threatened lichen species well-protected in Spain? Effectiveness of a protected areas network. Biol. Conserv. 133:500–511.
Medail, F. and P. Quezel. 1999. Biodiversity hotspots in the Mediterranean Basin: setting global conservation priorities. Conserv. Biol. 13:1510–1513.
Miller, J.R. and R. J. Hobbs. 2002. Conservation where people live and work. Conserv. Biol. 16:330–337.
Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. da Fonseca and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858.
O’Dea, N., M.B. Araujo and R.J. Whittaker. 2006. How well do Important Bird Areas represent species and minimize conservation conflict in the tropical Andes? Diversity and Distributions 12:205–214.
Oldfield, T.E.E., R.J. Smith, S.R. Harrop and N. Leader-Williams. 2004. A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy. Biol. Conserv. 120:303–447.
Poldini, L., G. Oriolo and C. Francescato. 2004. Mountain pine scrubs and heaths with Ericaceae in the South-Eastern Alps. Plant Biosyst. 138:53–85.
Ricotta, C., M.L. Carranza, G. Avena and C. Blasi. 2000. Quantitative comparison of the diversity of landscapes with actual vs. potential natural vegetation. App. Veg. Sci. 3:157–162.
Ricotta, C., M.L. Carranza, G. Avena and C. Blasi. 2002. Are potential natural vegetation maps a meaningful alternative to neutral landscape models? App. Veg. Sci. 5:271–275.
Rivas-Martìnez, S. 2004. Global Bioclimatics (Clasificación Bio-climática de la Tierra) http://www.globalbioclimatics. org/book/bioc/global_bioclimatics_1.htm (accessed June 2007)
Rocchini, D., G.L.W. Perry, M. Salerno, S. Maccherini and A. Chiarucci. 2006. Landscape change and the dynamics of open formations in a natural reserve. Landsc. Urban Planning 77:167–177.
Rodrigues, A.S.L., R. Tratt, B.D. Wheeler and K.J. Gaston. 1999. The performance of existing networks of conservation areas in representing biodiversity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences 266:1453–1460.
Rodrigues, A.S.L., S.J. Andelman, M.I. Bakan, L. Boitani, T.M. Brooks, R.M. Cowling, L.D.C. Fishpool, G.A.B. Da Fonseca, K.J. Gaston, M. Hoffmann, J.S. Long, P.A. Marquet, J.D. Pilgrim, R.L. Pressey, J. Schipper, W. Sechrest, S.H. Stuart, L.G. Underhill, R.W. Waller, M.E.J. Watts and X. Yan. 2004. Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428:640–643.
Scott, J.M., F.W. Davis, R.G. McGhie, R.G. Wright, C. Groves and J. Estes. 2001. Nature reserves: do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity? Ecol. App. 11:999–1007.
Soulè, M. E. and M.A. Sanjayan 1998. Conservation targets: do they help? Science 5359:2060–2061.
StatSoft 2001. STATISTICA (data analysis software system) , version 6.
Svenning, J.C. 2002. A review of natural vegetation openness in north-western Europe. Biological Conservation 104:133–148.
Tüxen, R. 1956. Die potentielle natürliche Vegetation als Gegenstand der Vegetationskartierung. Angewandte Pflanzensoziologie 13:5–42.
Westhoff, V. and E. van der Maarel. 1973. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In: Whittaker, R.H. (eds.) Ordination and classification of communities. Handbook of Vegetation Science Vol. 5, Junk, The Hague, NL. pp. 617–726.
Wildi, O. and B. O. Krüsi. 1992. Revision der Waldgesellschaften der Schweiz: Wunsch oder Notwendigkeit? Schweiz. Z. Forstw. 143:37–47.
World Resources Institute. 2006. EarthTrends: The Environmental Information Portal. Available at http://earthtrends.wri.org. Washington DC: World Resources Institute.
Zerbe, S. 1998. Potential natural vegetation: validity and applicability in landscape planning and nature conservation. App. Veg. Sci. 1:165–172.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Rosati, L., Marignani, M. & Blasi, C. A gap analysis comparing Natura 2000 vs National Protected Area network with potential natural vegetation. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 9, 147–154 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.9.2008.2.3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.9.2008.2.3