Content uploaded by Rachel Morrison
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rachel Morrison on Mar 06, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
A National Biodiversity Expenditure Review for Ireland: Final project report
Abstract and Figures
The NBER records biodiversity spending by government departments, agencies and NGOs between 2010 and 2015, using the categories of expenditure provided by BIOFIN. It then compares these with the seven biodiversity objectives and associated targets contained in Ireland’s National Biodiversity Action Plan 2011-2016 (maintained in the new NBAP 2017-2021) and the goals and targets comprising the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity agreed by the CBD Conference of the Parties in Aichi, Japan in 2010.This report explains the findings from the NBER and describes how the data has been presented and analysed in the accompanying database. The review provides the baseline from which expenditure data can continue to collected and analysed on an on-going basis to map trends in biodiversity finance and to determine its continuing relevance to national and international biodiversity targets.
Figures - uploaded by Rachel Morrison
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Rachel Morrison
Content may be subject to copyright.
... The Financial Needs Assessment (FNA) of Biodiversity in Ireland is the third in a complementary set of outputs informed by guidance issued by the Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP, 2018). Subsequent to the production of the National Biodiversity Expenditure Review (Morrison & Bullock, 2018) and Policy and Institutional Review (Mc Guinness & Bullock, 2020), the FNA aims to characterise the level of priority spending on biodiversity necessary to achieve key targets set out by Ireland's 4 th National Biodiversity Action Plan (NBAP) and provide tangible recommendations for changes in how biodiversity finance can be optimised. This latter goal can be achieved through four main mechanisms: ...
... Most of the Objective 1 and 4 targets do not require significant new spending as they are mostly linked to existing AES. Indeed, the NBER indicated the dominance of agricultural supports at both State-and EU-level in supporting farmland biodiversity, accounting for 75% of total spending on biodiversity between 2010-2015 (Morrison & Bullock, 2018). This spending is constituted by a diversity of schemes, ranging across incremental, activity-based and results-based payments. ...
... NPWS Farm Plans also apply to sensitive coastal habitats including dunes, coastal grasslands and heath, although the extent of this is limited at present (DCHG, 2017a). Given the overlap between these habitats and various sectoral schemes dedicated to broader conservation, water quality and sustainable agriculture funding supports, identifying existing spending on coastal habitats has not been possible in previous expenditure exercises (Morrison & Bullock, 2018) as costs were embedded within the generalised costs associated within the former NBAP Target 4: Conserve and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services in the wider countryside and Target 6: Expand and improve management of protected areas and species. ...
... A comprehensive National Biodiversity Expenditure Review (NBER) has previously been conducted for 2010-2015, using bestavailable data (Morrison and Bullock, 2018). Additionally, the recently published 6 th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity (DCHG, 2019) provides a useful contemporary review of Ireland's performance towards achieving the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. ...
... At present, 42% of biodiversity funding in Ireland comes from the European Union (Morrison and Bullock, 2018). Funding received from the EU is based on the bloc's Multi-annual Financial Framework (MFF) system, with budgets currently lying in the 2014-2020 MFF. ...
... Of the six categories comprising the MFF, Sustainable Growth: Natural Resources is that relevant for biodiversity and covers much of the annual disbursement of EU funding affecting biodiversity, including CAP and CFP funding. Indeed, agricultural payments have been found to comprise the vast majority (75%) of biodiversity expenditure in Ireland (Morrison and Bullock, 2018). In addition to annual funding from the EU, conservation of Irish biodiversity also benefits from the acquisition of research and conservation grants offered by the EU, such as EU LIFE, INTERREG and Local Agenda 21. ...
The Policy and Institutional Review (PIR) sets the foundation for the larger Biodiversity Finance Ireland research project, by examining the policies and institutions that provide the current context for conservation funding in Ireland. The PIR examines the rationale for this funding, the sustainability of the funding streams, the degree to which spending is consistent with the objectives of the National Biodiversity Action Plan and existing and potential synergies.
... The IUCN has called for all OECD countries to contribute at least 0.3% of their GDP on biodiversity conservation, but between 2010 and 2015 Ireland spent only 0.13% (Morrison and Bullock, 2018). In Ireland, the State is the main body providing funding for biodiversity conservation. ...
... In Ireland, the State is the main body providing funding for biodiversity conservation. However, marine and coastal systems receive much less funding than terrestrial or freshwater domains (Morrison and Bullock, 2018). In the period 2010-2015, the terrestrial domain received 90.3% of the funding allocated to biodiversity conservation, compared to 8.4% and 1.3% for the freshwater and marine domains, respectively. ...
Biodiversity is a key indicator of ecosystem health and plays an important role in providing ecosystem services that are essential for economic development and social well-being. In Ireland, climate change and anthropogenic pressures have led to biodiversity loss and habitat degradation, which in turn affects the provision of ecosystem services. The aim of this study was to determine how marine coastal biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Republic of Ireland are portrayed in the scientific literature, news media, and current legislation in order to identify knowledge gaps and priority areas of intervention for policymakers and other decision-making stakeholders. A review of the scientific literature based on the Scopus database suggests a lack of stakeholder involvement in the scientific-based approach. Up to 2022 research on marine coastal biodiversity focused primarily on species richness and diversity, especially in the context of climate change, while research on ecosystem services focused primarily on ecosystem function. Analysis of the news media found that coverage of biodiversity and ecosystem services has increased over the past decade, but opportunities are being missed to raise public awareness of the multiple benefits, not just economic, of marine coastal ecosystems, their biodiversity, and the services they provide. The terms “biodiversity” and “ecosystem services” have only been introduced into Irish legislation in recent years. The legislative context at the national level is rather fragmented at diverse levels and mainly corresponds to the transposition of European Directives while national specific legislation is less developed. The interconnection between these three domains: scientific, news media and legislative was not evident in this study, especially in the case of the scientific field. Efforts to promote science-based knowledge, communication, collaboration, and transparency between these domains are crucial to support informed decision-making and promote public engagement while conserving biodiversity. Addressing the information gaps identified in this work could help advance the implementation of Nature-based Solutions (NbS), key cost-effective measures to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change while protecting biodiversity and ecosystem services.
... The idea of the expansion of the paradigm on a national scale appears to be attractive and will benefit Irish environmental biodiversity which is key for National Policy [41], recognizing the vital role of ecological engineering in the design of sustainable ecosystems that integrate human society with its natural environment for the benefit of both [42]. ...
The effectiveness of using enhanced evapotranspiration rates of willow plantation is a modern environmentally friendly practice for advanced treatment of effluent WWTP flow. The key idea is that through advanced willow evapotranspiration rates, a significant proportion of the effluent flow can be transferred into the atmosphere through the physical process of evapotranspiration. This study further discusses the concept in a real-world problem using a wide dataset consisting of a recent PET monthly remote dataset namely RASPOTION, monthly recorded rainfall gauge, and experimental willow evapotranspiration surveys across Ireland, to identify the monthly cropping pattern. A Monte Carlo water balance model has been developed for the period 2003-2016. The model was applied in an existing willow plantation at Donard WWTP co. Wicklow, Ireland to identify the exceedance probability of willow plantation runoff against estimated low flows (i.e., Q 95 , Q 99) at the adjacent small tributary. In this case study, any failure which can lead to river quality deterioration was not assessed. The overall framework aims to provide new insights considering the multiple sources of uncertainty (i.e., monthly willow cropping pattern and WWTP effluent flow) in associated environmental engineering problems.
... The issue of recognition goes to the heart of transformation to a more participatory form of governance, with many community groups citing engaging with state agencies and having their concerns listened to as one of their biggest challenges. This is sometimes related to lack of resources and staff at environmental and biodiversity agencies in Ireland (Morrison and Bullock, 2018), which can lead to institutional inertia and a lack of will to engage or understand why participation is important . The sense of frustration felt by some participants with this lack of engagement was evident: "If it isn't economic, there's very little interest, that's what it seems like. ...
The ability to maintain livelihoods in the face of major environmental, political, economic and social stresses is fundamental to building resilient social and ecological communities. This research examines the place community has in this challenge and specifically the role of community involvement in the conservation of peatland social-ecological systems. It explores transformative change at local levels and the relational networks, diverse economies and range of resources communities draw on to achieve this change. Evidence is drawn from a survey, interviews and three case studies of rural community groups in the Irish midlands to provide an overview of local dynamics in peatland conservation and wider issues of place-based development and adaptation. Drawing on theoretical insights from resilience, resourcefulness and diverse economies scholarship, this research reveals the role of local communities in both adapting to, and enacting, change through everyday forms of resilience that are commonplace and ubiquitous in people's lives yet often invisible and under-valued. Thematic areas are identified which provide insights into how communities are: engaging in diverse work practices that foster ecological livelihoods and planetary well-being; co-creating community science projects through local networks and multi-level partnerships; and developing management and stewardship cultures that emphasise collaboration, co-operation and the commons. This research will help actors at a variety of scales to plan and implement more collaborative and inclusive research and restoration programs for peatland conservation. It also has relevance for regions with landscapes in transition that seek to initiate equitable community capacity-building programs and diverse economies in the shift from extractive to regenerative land use. These transitions will require investment and resources both for ecosystem restoration and the relational networks that are so crucial to the work of building the collaborative communities, cultures and economies of the future.
... The Pocket-a theme across the community engagement discussion (and the conference as a whole) was how under-resourced the environment sector is relative to other sectors, with investment in biodiversity representing only 0.31% of total government expenditure (Morrison and Bullock 2018). Community groups and networks have the added challenge of being under-funded relative to other programmes in the environment sector. ...
... The Pocket-a theme across the community engagement discussion (and the conference as a whole) was how under-resourced the environment sector is relative to other sectors, with investment in biodiversity representing only 0.31% of total government expenditure (Morrison and Bullock 2018). Community groups and networks have the added challenge of being under-funded relative to other programmes in the environment sector. ...
This paper synthesises a number of meaningful practices and transferable insights from sessions at the 2019 National Biodiversity Conference on engagement in biodiversity conservation. To achieve this, a diverse selection of contributors working with youth, the business and farming sectors, local communities, the general public and society at large, reflected on their research, practice and understandings using Dunford's (2019) triadic framework of engagement—the Pocket, Head and Heart. Across the range of social groups and scales involved, and different methodological approaches employed in each contributor's work to date, the paper finds that an overarching principle to successfully progressing all engagement work is the value of developing collaborative relationships among stakeholders in order to help identify and achieve shared conservation goals. It concludes that co-designed and appropriately resourced all-island, place-based or sectoral approaches, together with citizen science and public education, accessible to everyone from youth to retirees, offer effective practices for growing and strengthening collaborative relationships. Key to these practices is authentic and meaningful engagement across age groups, communities, sectors, institutions and public authorities, in order to achieve the ultimate shared goal of biodiversity conservation for this and future generations.
An overview of natural capital accounting approaches, data requirements and how best to apply and develop in the Irish context, using catchments as pilot study areas.
Early report on value on benefits of ecosystem services in Ireland
The document provides guidance designed to ensure that expenditure of EU funds does not have an adverse impact on biodiversity. The general guidance document is supported by specific guidance relating to different EU funds (Cohesion Funds, CAP, Connecting Europe Facility and European Maritime and Fisheries Fund).
In order to incorporate the ecosystem services framework into policy related to the
management of freshwater resources the full range of Ireland’s freshwater ecosystems
and their underlying biological resources must be identified. This report consolidates this
knowledge and outlines current pressures and management structures relating to
freshwaters in Ireland. It then identifies the diversity of ecosystem services Irish society
derives from the full range of its freshwater resources and rates their relative importance.
The report projects how the delivery and sustainability of ecosystem services provided by
Irish freshwaters may change in relation to selected management strategies into the
future and describes the resulting implications for the achievement of WFD and FD goals.
Semi-natural grassland habitats have declined significantly throughout Europe. To halt the decline, grassland conservation measures have been included in most European agri-environment schemes. This is the first study to compare the botanical composition of grassland habitats managed under the Irish Agri-Environment Options Scheme (AEOS). Sixty fields on drystock pastoral farms in receipt of agri-environment payments for grassland conservation were surveyed, with 20 fields being enrolled in each of the following AEOS options: Traditional Hay Meadow (THM), Species-Rich Grassland (SRG) and Natura 2000 species-rich grassland (Natura). The vegetation quality of sites enrolled in the Natura measure was higher than the quality of those enrolled in the THM and SRG measures. Natura sites had the greatest species richness, with a mean >40 species per site, which included approximately 17 species indicative of high botanical quality. Traditional Hay Meadows sites had the lowest species richness (mean: 29 species per site) and were dominated by species associated with improved grassland. Some THM sites had good levels of botanical richness and were similar in composition to Natura sites, with some Natura sites having lower vegetation quality, more similar to that of THM sites. Species-Rich Grassland had botanical richness that was intermediate between THM and Natura sites. A thorough assessment of the effectiveness of these measures was confounded by a lack of quantitative objectives for the target community composition to be attained. We discuss limitations and potential opportunities regarding the design, targeting, implementation and cost-effectiveness of these agri-environment measures.
High Nature Value (HNV) farmland is typically characterised by low-intensity farming associated with high biodiversity and species of conservation concern. Mapping the occurrence and distribution of such farmland are useful for appropriate targeting of conservation measures and supporting associated rural communities. We mapped the likely distribution of HNV farmland in the Republic of Ireland using a linear regression model incorporating established European indicators, adapted for Ireland and weightings based on expert opinion. The indicators used were semi-natural habitat cover, stocking density, hedgerow density, river and stream density and soil diversity, with highest weightings placed on the first two indicators (40% and 30%, respectively). The map provides information on the likely occurrence and distribution of HNV farmland in each electoral division as a reference point for future monitoring of the distribution of HNV farmland in the Republic of Ireland in order to assist with planning and policy development for the rural environment.
The rising popularity of biodiversity offsetting as a tool for balancing biodiversity losses from development with equivalent
gains elsewhere has sparked debate on many fronts. The fundamental questions are the following: Is offsetting good, bad, or
at least better than the status quo for biodiversity conservation outcomes, and what do we need to know to decide? We present
a concise synthesis of the most contentious issues related to biodiversity offsetting, categorized as ethical, social, technical,
or governance challenges. In each case, we discuss avenues for reducing disagreement over these issues and identify those
that are likely to remain unresolved. We argue that there are many risks associated with the unscrutinized expansion of offset
policy. Nevertheless, governments are increasingly adopting offset policies, so working rapidly to clarify and—where possible—to
resolve these issues is essential.
This article looks at a number of significant strands of funding that have supported nature conservation in the UK over the last decade and considers how funding streams might change in the future.
This book considers the opportunities for scaling-up finance for biodiversity across six so-called "innovative financial mechanisms" as classified by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). These are: Environmental fiscal reform; payments for ecosystem services; biodiversity offsets; markets for green products; biodiversity in climate change funding; and biodiversity in international development finance. Drawing on literature and more than 40 case studies worldwide, the book addresses the following questions: What are these mechanisms and how do they work How much finance have they mobilised and what potential is there to scale this up And what are the key design and implementation issues - including environmental and social safeguards - That need to be addressed so that governments can help ensure these mechanisms are environmentally effective, economically efficient and distributionally equitable.