PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017

Nature and its role in the transition to a
Green Economy
Patrick ten Brink, IEEP
4 Rue de la Science, Brussels 1000, Belgium
11 Belgrave Road, London, SW1V 1RB, UK
www.ieep.eu drussi@ieep.eu ptenbrink@ieep.eu
Oxford MSc Environmental Change and Management:
17th March 2017
Brussels

Presentation Structure
ten Brink P., Mazza L., Badura T., Kettunen M. & Withana S. (2012) Nature and its Role in the Transition to a Green Economy.
http://www.ieep.eu/publications/2012/10/nature-and-its-role-in-the-transition-to-a-green-economy--1157
1. What is a green economy?
2. What is nature’s role in the transition to a
green economy?
3. Questions to the audience
4. Conclusions

What is a ?
UNEP defines a green economy as “one that
results in improved human well-being and
social equity, while significantly reducing
environmental risks and ecological scarcities.
(UNEP 2011).
(UNEP 2011) ‘Towards a Green Economy – Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication, A Synthesis for Policy Makers’,
Www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_synthesis_en.pdf

A confusing landscape of similar terms?
Green Growth (OECD, 2011) – “fostering economic growth and development,
while ensuring that natural assets continue to provide the resources and
environmental services on which our well-being relies”
Arguably a narrower concept than the green economy.
Green New Deals - gained prominence following the 2007-2008 economic and
financial crises - Economic policy strategy for ensuring a more economically
and environmentally sustainable world economic recovery that could act as a
catalyst in a transition to a green economy.
(ten Brink et al., 2012 building on UNEP’s March 2009 Policy Brief and Global Green New Deal, Barbier, 2010),
…a shorter time scale stimulus to a green economy
Sustainable Development (Brundtland Report; SD strategy) - development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs. (The Brundtland Report, ‘Our Common Future’ WCED, 1987)
…with its economic, social and environmental pillars, SD is arguably a wider
concept than the green economy.

Source: building on REES (2003)
Ecological Economic Worldview
Matter
/Energy
Waste
Solar
Energy
Heat
Matter
/Energy
ECONOMIC
PRODUCTION
RECYCLE
Waste
GROWING ECONOMIC SYSTEM
FINITE ECOSYSTEM

Nature and links to the Economy
Society
Environment
Economic Sectors
(examples)
- Agriculture, hunting, forestry & fishing
- Oil and gas; mining & quarrying
- Wood and wood products
- Food products, beverages & tobacco
- Textiles, textile products & leather
- Pulp, paper & paper products
- Rubber & plastics products
- Research & development
Outputs from one sector can be
intermediate inputs to another
Outputs:
Products&services
Public
Sector
House-
holds
Private
Sector
Man-made capital
(inc. financial capital)
The Economy
€€
€
Exports
€ €
Resource depletion
InputsfromHumanandSocialCapital
Labour,institutions
InputsfromNaturalCapital
Naturalresourcesandecosystemservices
Abiotic resources
Ecosystem services
Abiotic subsoil assets
e.g. provisioning, cultural,
& regulating services
Biodiversity (Ecosystems,
Species, Genes)
Abiotic flows
e.g. solar energy, wind
e.g. mineral, fossil fuels,
construction materials
Other Resource flows
e.g. water
DirectbenefitfromNature-inc.ecosystemservices
Waste,
waste water
Pollution,
GHGs
Polluted land, soil Polluted marine env.
Polluted air Climate change
Biodiversity loss

GoodGovernance
&funding
Current Situation
Declining Sustainability:
Brown, Linear, Economy
Resource over-exploitation &
pollution pressures
Climate Change
Biodiversity and natural
capital loss
Critical ecological & resource
thresholds passed or at risk
Resource scarcity and limited
access to a clean
environment
Health impacts and man-
made natural disasters
GDP growth driven
An economy that is not
resource efficient, low carbon
and socially inclusive
Ambitions for the Future
A Green Economy
Improved human well-being &
social equity, while reducing env.
risks and ecological scarcities
Staying within a ‘safe operating
space’: resource use within the
planet’s regenerative capacities &
avoid critical ecological thresholds
No net loss of biodiversity &
‘acceptable’ climate change
Sustainability for future
generations & business: available
natural capital, resources & clean
environment
Health and livelihoods for citizens
and communities
Beyond GDP metrics
An economy decoupled from
environmental impacts and
resource use
Building Blocks in the
Transition to a Green Economy
Business-as-Usual
Approaches
Avoiding Unsustainable Trade-
offs
+
Environmental compliance &
infrastructure
Active environmental
management
Active Risk Management
+
Proactive Investment in Natural
Capital
Pursuing environmental
sustainability
Eco-efficiency
+ Circular Economy measures
+ Decoupling via Radical
Innovation & Demand change
+
+
Source: Patrick ten Brink, Leonardo Mazza, Jean-Pierre Schweitzer - own representation
Building Blocks in the Transition to a Green Economy

Good governance: improving integration & coherence
OPERAs WP4
• Understand how the NC/ESS concepts are integrated into Policy –
at EU level and at the country level (Scottish exemplar)
• Clarify where there are gaps and needs for further integration in
policies
• This will help identify cases of win-wins (i.e. good mainstreaming),
opportunities for avoiding trade-offs (i.e. where NC/ESS not
mainstreamed but where it should be) and overall improvement in
the added value of policy making and good governance.
• + create a basis for understanding which instruments can help
Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1

NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration
OPERAS WP4 Analysis: Categorising integration
Level of
integration
Conceptual integration Operational integration
Comprehensive
and explicit
All ecosystem services &
recognition of contribution to
human wellbeing
Dedicated instruments enabling
comprehensive integration.
Explicit but not
comprehensive
Some ecosystem services &
recognition of contribution to
human wellbeing
Some instruments that
proactively address / build on
ESS/NC within the policy area.
Implicit and
incomprehensive
Generally focus on preventing
negative impacts of a policy
sector to ecosystem services and
natural capital
Some aspects - mainly avoid
negative impacts on (some)
ecosystem services - integrated
into sectoral instruments.
No specific
integration
No recognition (direct / indirect)
of ecosystem services and
natural capital
No instruments exist that would in
any way address ESS/NC.
Source: Kettunen et al 2014: WP 4 Deliverable 4.1

NC/ESS: status and opportunities of integration
OPERAS WP4 Analysis: working insights & examples
Policy sector Conceptual integration Operational integration (examples)
Air
Clean Air Policy Package
Clean Air Programme for Europe
Negative effects of air pollution to ecosystems are addressed, but not the
positive effects that ecosystems have on air quality or consequences of
pollution on ESS.
Soil
Soil Thematic Strategy.
EU Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe
No dedicated policy instruments; Some aspects integrated into CAP & Land
Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)
Water
Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources
Some indirect proactive elements - e.g recognising the role of natural flood
retention areas under the Flood Directive;
None of the existing instruments explicitly recognise the role ecosystem
services in maintaining water quality or maintaining ground water sources.
Agriculture &
rural dev.
Some ESS promoted under Pillars of the EU Common
Agriculture Policy (CAP).
Some proactive elements (mainly agri-environment-climate, support to Natura
2000 areas, and non-productive investment measures in Member States’ RDPs)
Forestry EU Forest Strategy
No separate / dedicated instruments for forest ecosystem services.
EU Treaties : limited EU competence for common forest policy
Marine & coastal
(incl. fisheries)
Marine Strategy Framework Directive
EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)
Some pro-active elements recognising the role of ecosystem service.
A number of instruments preventing negative impacts on ecosystems.
Regional
development /
Cohesion Policy
Regulations for Cohesion Policy funds (ERDF, ESF
and CP) - recognise and addressed ecosystem
services explicitly.
Opportunities for win-wins of ESS and Reg. Dev / Cohesion policy objectives
Not obligatory for the Member States to take up these opportunities.
Nor obligatory to integrate ecosystem services into reporting on results / outputs
of ERDF and CP funding.
Climate
Mitigation &
Adaptation
Mitigation: & EU LULUCF (Land Use, Land Use
Change and Forestry) accounting rules
EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change
recognises ecosystems services
Mitigation: direct but not comprehensive. e.g. Wetlands
Adaptation: mainly indirect, preventing negative impacts on ES / ESS. Only
explicit instrument is support to ecosystem-based approaches under EU funds.
Bio-energy
Ecosystem services are referred to directly in the
Renewable Energy Directive
There are no EU-level sustainability criteria for solid biomass.
Transport & grey
infrastructure
Union guidelines for the development of the trans-
European transport network
Indirect, preventing negative impacts on ecosystems - via EU environmental
impact assessment procedure.

Nature at the core of the Green Economy
Working with nature should be at the heart of the transition to
a green economy
• Nature is essential to the health and growth of economies, societies and
individuals through the provision of a multitude of ecosystem services.
• In spite of this, the values of nature to economies and society have often
been overlooked and not reflected in the decisions of policy makers,
businesses, communities or citizens
• This contributes to the loss of biodiversity and subsequent impacts on
people and the economy.

Abiotic sub-soil assets:
(geological resources) Minerals, earth elements, fossil
fuels, gravel, salts... (Depletable)
Other abiotic assets:
Ozone layer, climate system… (Depletable)
Solar Radiation … (Non-depletable)
Abiotic flows:
(linked to geophysical cycles)
Solar, wind, geo-thermal, hydro…
(Non-depletable)
Material flows: phosphate, fertilizer, fossil fuels, gravel…
(Depletable)
Other flows: radiation protection
(Depletable)
Ecosystems as Assets - Ecosystem Capital:
Extent, structure and condition of ecosystems
e.g. forests, woodlands, rivers, lakes, oceans, coasts, wetlands,
tundra, grasslands, croplands, heathlands and urban parks…
Genes and Species as Assets (i.e. genetic capital):
Rarity, diversity, uniqueness...
Ecosystems service flows:
Provision of food, fibre, water, energy, medicines…
Regulation & maintenance, e.g. of climate, river flow,
water purification, pollination, soil erosion…
Cultural services, e.g. recreational and spiritual use of
nature, scientific knowledge…
(Depletable)
“Biotic” Assets
(linked to ecological systems, processes & their components)
(Depletable)
Natural Capital (Stock)
Source:
Components of Natural Capital and Flows of Goods and Services
“Abiotic” Assets
(linked to geo-physical systems, processes & their components)
Flow of Goods and Services

Natural capital, ecosystem services, wellbeing and livelihoods and their integration
into stakeholder decision making, policies and instruments
HUMAN WELLBEING & LIVELIHOODS
Direct livelihood support
Food and materials, water…
Security & resilience
Food security, mitigation of
natural disasters, climate
change adaptation &
mitigation
Health (physical & mental)
Access to clean air & water,
disease control, micro-climate
regulation & wellbeing
Social relations
Social cohesion, integration
NATURAL CAPITAL
Natura 2000 network and
wider green infrastructure
Human
capital
Man-made
capital
Social
capital
Source: Own Representation building on MA (2005) and TEEB (2011a)
c
INSTRUMENTS
Planning and zoning (e.g. Natura
2000 site), permitting, regulation &
enforcement, investment, EIA &
SEA, MBIs, property rights,
procurement, information,
accounts & assessment et al.
Impacts
Understanding of
benefits
& integration in
decision making
Freedom
of choice
and action
Opportunity to
be able to
achieve what
an individual
values doing
and being –
e.g. access to
green space
Supporting:
nutrient
cycling, soil
formation,
crop
pollination
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Cultural:
aesthetic, spiritual,
recreational,
knowledge…
Provisioning:
food, timber, raw
materials, water…
Regulating:
water purification &
retention, climate
control, pest &
disease control…
Mainstreaming via integration in policy and
use of instruments
INSTITUTIONS &
STAKEHOLDERS
Government & public
institutions, regional & local
authorities, health sector,
companies, communities, NGOs,
academia & citizens.
POLICIES
Biodiversity, forestry,
agriculture & food, fisheries,
climate and energy, health,
poverty, product policy,
regional development,
development co-operation,
transport, water et al.

Managing the Transition to a Green Economy is Key
Managing the transition to a green economy will need
to take into account not only the opportunity of win-
wins, but also the risks of losses for certain groups and
trade-offs across sectors and over time.

9632
584 584 584
1220 1220
8412
987 987
-9318
10821
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000
Subsidies
Restoration
costs
Storm
Protection
Commercial
profits from
mangrove
forest
Commercial
profits from
shrimp farming
Economic
returns from
mangrove
including fish
nursery
Economic returns
from shrimp
farming
excluding
subsidies
Economic value
of mangroves
including storm
protection
Economic value of
shrimp farming
and restoration
costs
All values are NPV over 9 years and a 10% discount rate, given in 1996 US$.Source: drawn from data from Barbier et al., 2007 and Hanley and Barbier, 2009
Fish nursery
Understanding perspectives: Benefits provided by mangroves &
shrimp farms: an economic illustration (in US$/ha NPV 9 years 10% discount rate)
For further details see
Chapter 2, page 13 of the
TEEB Water and Wetlands report
and associated references

Understanding Nature’s Values is important
There must be a clear understanding of the value of nature and
how to take this value into account in public and private decisions
in light of the multiple benefits it provides.
This is one of many ways of assessing the role and importance of
nature.
Anthropocentric values are one part of the story – intrinsic values
and ethical concerns also critical to consider in decision making.

EU’s Natura 2000 network: 28,000 sites ~ 18 % of EU
Funding a challenge
Costs ~ 5.8 bnEUR/yr
Source: Gantioler et al 2010
Natura 2000 benefits
Illustrative value of
between €200-300 bn/yr
ten Brink et al. (2012)
Carbon Value:
Natura 2000 network stores
~ 9.6 btC (equiv. 35 bt CO2),
Worth ~ €607bn-€1,130bn
(stock value in 2010)
Markandya & Ding in ten Brink et al., 2012
European Commission using the argument of Natura 2000’s values
to get support and funding… It also featured in the recent REFIT

Protected areas as promoters of regional economy (Finland)
© Wikimedia Simo Räsänen
Name or
national park
Some
examples of
total 37
Local,
accumulative
economic
impacts of
visits (EUR
mil / year)
Person-
years of
employme
nt
Nuuksio 2.1 16
Pallas-
Yllastunturi
34.3 450
Oulanka 15.5 200
Etc.
According to the assessment €1
investment in national parks and other
key protected areas can results in €10
return to local economies.
See Kettunen et al. (2012) TEEB Nordic , Kettunen and ten
Brink (2013) and Metsahallitus for references

Human & societal well-being depends on nature
The rural poor in particular are fundamentally dependent on
ecosystem services.
Where natural capital is degraded and lost, there is a risk that the
livelihoods of entire communities are undermined & humans suffer.
Biodiversity is not a luxury of the rich but essential for many of the
world’s poor.

Marine Protected Areas increase living standards
MPA: Tubbataha Reefs, Philippines - UNESCO World Heritage site: 396 species of
corals & higher species diversity than the Great Barrier Reef
Problem Recognition –
1998 Bleaching & losses
Policy Solution
“No-take” areas agreed
Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park Act in 2010
+ 10 mile buffer zone around marine reserve
Impacts of policy
 Increase coral cover – 40% 1999-2003, 50% 2004
 Fish biomass in nearby reefs doubled since 2000 and fish
catches almost doubled 1999 – 2004
Survey: significant increase in living standards 2000 to 2004
Sources: Tongson 2007, Samonte-Tan et al. 2008, Dygico 2006; in TEEBCases for TEEB for local and regional Policy

Human & societal well-being depends on nature
Also the Health and wellbeing of citizens in cities
is affected significantly by (access to) nature
See: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Tyrväinen L., Hujala T., Ojala
A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection – Executive summary. A report for the European
Commission (ENV.B.3/ETU/2014/0039), Institute for European Environmental Policy, London / Brussels.
http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_-_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf
• Understand and
communicate benefits
• Understand the different
stakeholder roles
• Communicate the
opportunities of integration
• Develop recommendations
for a way forward

Improved climatic conditions & avoiding heat stress
Vitoria-Gasteiz and Salburua
Wetlands
5 degree UHI and city high with a
vulnerability to heatwaves
• Green belt around the city connects
urban areas and integrates wetlands,
Salburua (Ramsar, No. 1263) and the
Zadorra River.
• Provide 250,000 citizens opportunities for
cooling oases and recreation spaces.
Never more than 300 meters from green
or blue infrastructure
• Vitoria-Gasteiz was European Green
Capital in 2012
Natura 2000
Peri-urban GI

Finland, Kuopio – Moved by Nature
• Aim: to promote collaboration with the health
sector in Finland and allow vulnerable groups
to benefit from access to physical activity in
natural spaces across Finland
• Activities in the pilot study in Kuopio: ice
fishing, canoeing & swimming in Lake Kallavesi
• 16 men at risk of Type-2 Diabetes involved -
reduced average weight by 3.75 kilos each.
• Funded by the European Union Social Fund
(75%) and public and private organisations, with
a total budget of 348 000 €.
Outdoor recreation and physical activity
Source: ten Brink P., Mutafoglu K., Schweitzer J-P., Kettunen M., Twigger-Ross C., Baker J., Kuipers Y., Emonts M., Hujala T.,
Tyrväinen L., and Ojala A. (2016) The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection. A report for the European

Physical and mental nature based rehabilitation
Alnarp Rehabilitation Garden
(Sweden)
• Ongoing pilot into the effectiveness of
nature based rehabilitation (NBR).
Exploring impacts on stress related
mental illness, post stroke rehabilitation
and war neuroses (i.e. with refugees)
• Alnarp garden was the first pilot site, now
expanded to 11 gardens, supported by
local universities and regional
government.
• Alnarp results– patients primary care cost
dropped 28%, days in hospital fell 64%
• 1.3 million euros to treat 250-300
patients per year

Investments in nature can save money
Investments in nature today – whether restoration or
protected area management – can save money and promote
economic growth in the long term and must therefore be seen
as an integral part of the transition to and the foundation of a
green economy.

1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000
Coral reefs [7]
Coastal systems/Mangroves/Estuaries [9]
Marine [4]
Woodland/Shrubland [7]
Lakes/Rivers [26]
Inland Wetlands [4]
Tropical forest [10]
Temperate forest [20]
Grassland/Rangeland [6]
2
43
1
7
65
1415131211
10
89
16
Restoration: can be costly, but can offer good returns
For example: Germany: peatland restoration: avoidance cost of CO2 ~ 8 to 12 €/t CO2
(0-4 alt. land use). Lower than many other carbon capture and storage options
Sources:Aronsonetal.2010
For further details see
Chapter 5, page 48 of the
TEEB Water and Wetlands report
and associated references
(Costs: $/ha)
Sources: Förster (2010); MLUV MV (2009); Schäfer (2009)

Social Cohesion and Regeneration via Nature
Hoge Kempen National Park, Belgium
• Closure of last coal mines in the province of Limburg
left 40,000 unemployed & vast brownfield areas
threatened with post-industrial decline, including
large wetland lakes left from extraction areas
• 2006: following efforts of local environmental NGO
Regional Landschap Kempen en Maasland (RLKM) site
became Belgium’s first national park, covering a
number of Natura 2000 sites
• Investments in conservation on the basis of economic
argument - direct/indirect employment FTE 400 jobs,
direct economic benefits of ~ 20 MEUR (Van den Bosh, 2012).
• Total 128 MEUR invested in the park, compared to an
annual indirect revenue creation of 191 MEUR

City Cooling and Public Access to Green-Blue infrastructure
Lyon, Berges du Rhône, France
• 2003: heat wave increased mortality in Lyon by
80%, above average for a French city
• Rhône River which runs through the city has
been at the heart of the solution.
• Aim: to increase access to cool & shaded areas,
rain water harvesting, sustainable drainage
and reduce flood risk by increasing run off.
• 2007: reopened public access to the banks of
the river (Grand Lyon, 2014). €42 million
redevelopment, Berges du Rhône - asphalt car
park replaced with 5km of riverside pathway
and green spaces
• Riverside redevelopments to provide 25,000
new homes and 14,000 new jobs by 2030

Identifying synergies: nature based solutions to Socio
Economic priorities
Brief introduction to an ongoing project
&
a couple of questions to you!

Nature base solutions can address national socio-
economic priorities (project for DGENV, ongoing)
Economic growth
(incl. sector development /
diversification, fiscal
consolidation)
Jobs and skills
(incl. innovation)
Public health
Regional
development
Urban development/
regeneration & living
environment
Demographic
change and
social justice
(incl. social
cohesion/equity)
Agriculture
AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DK1, FR3,
EL2, HU1, IE1, IE4, IT1, IT2, IT3, LT1,
LU1, LV2, NL1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2,
PT3, SK1, SK3, SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2
AT2, BE3, BG1, CY1, CZ2, DE2,
DK1, FR3, EL2, HU1, IE4, IT1,
IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2, NL1,
PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1,
SI1, ES1, ES2, UK1, SE2
AT2, BE3, BG1, CZ2, DE2, FR3, EL2,
LT1, LU1, NL1, PL1, PT1, SI1, ES1
AT2, BE3, BG1, DE2 CY1, CZ2, FR3,
EL2, IE1, IT2, IT3, LT1, LU1, LV2,
NL1, PL1, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI1,
ES1, SE2
BE3
BE3, CY1, CZ2, PL1, PT1, SI1,
ES1
Forestry
BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1, LV1, LV3,
PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2,
ES2, SE2
BG1, CY1, FI1, IE4, IT1, LT1,
LV1, PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, SK1,
SI2, ES2, SE2
BG1, FI1, LT1, LV3, PL1, PT1
BG1, CY1, FI1, LT1, LV1, PL1, PT1,
PT2, PT3, SK1, SI2, SE2
FI1, PL1, PT1, SI2
Fisheries CY3, IE4, IT4, PL3, PT3, ES3, SE2 CY3, IE4, IT4, ES3, SE2 ES3 CY3, IT4, ES3, SE2
Tourism
AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2, FR2,
EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL1, PL3,
PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SE1,
SI1, SI3, ES2, ES3, UK1, UK3
AT1, BG3, CY2, CY3, DE3, FI2,
FR2, EL3, HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2,
PL1, PL3, PT1, PT2, PT3, RO1,
RO2, SK2, SE1, SI1, SI3, ES2,
ES3, UK1, UK3
BG3, FI2, EL3, LT2, PL3, PT2, RO1,
RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2
AT1, BG3, CY2, DE3, FI2, FR2, EL3,
HU3, LT2, LU2, MT2, PL3, PT1,
PT2, PT3, RO1, RO2, SK2, SI3, ES2,
SE1
AT1
Climate
AT3, BE1, BE2, CY1, CY3, CZ1, DK2,
FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3, NL3,
PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1, SE3
AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, CZ1, DK2,
FR4, EL1, IE4, LT3, LV1, MT3,
NL3, PT3, RO3, ES4, UK1
AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, CY3, CZ1,
FR1, FR4, EL1, IE1, LT3, LU3, NL3,
PL2, PT3, RO3, SK3, ES4, UK1, SE3
CY1, CY3, CZ1, EL1, LT3, LV1, PT3,
SK3, ES4, UK1
AT3, BE1, BE2, CY3, DE1, DK3, FR1, FR4,
EL1, IE1, MT3, NL3, RO3, SK3, SE3
AT3, FR4, EL1, PL2, RO3
Health
AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, EL1, IE4,
MT1, UK3
AT3, BE2, FI4, EL1, MT1
AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR1, FR4,
EL1, IE2, IE4, , MT1, UK3
CZ3, FI4, UK3
AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FR1, FR4, EL1, IE2,
MT1
AT3, BE2, BG2, CZ3, FI4, FR4,
EL1, IE2, MT1
Construction,
Energy and
Transport
AT3, BE1, BE2,IE3, IE4, IT1, MT3, NL2,
PT1, PT3, ES2, UK2
AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, IE4, IT1,
MT3, NL2, ES2, UK2
AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3, IE3,, NL2,
UK2
AT3, LU3
AT3, BE1, BE2, DE1, DK3,IE3,, LU3, MT3,
NL2, UK2, SE3
AT3, BE1, BE2, IE3, LU3

Promising Area: Eco-tourism (Example Luxembourg)
Illustrative indicators:
• Total area of Natura 2000 and wider attractive
landscapes
• Availability of nature based recreation areas
Current Situation
Natura 2000
Accessibility
EU Funds
Lack of
awareness
Social norms
and habits
Labelling schemes
Landscape
degradation
Future potential
Agri-tourism, wine
tourism, cycle tourism
Promotion of physical
activity
Guides, nature
conservation, sport and
recreation services
Increased rural income
and viability
RD
Links with green
infrastructure
investments
UD
Viability of rural
communities
DSJ
Benefits
PH
JS
EG
Local/regional
investments in
infrastructure (hiking
trails, cycle paths, etc.)
Contribution to
priorities:
outcomes
LU: 66 Natura
2000 sites 83k ha
ESF, ERDF, LIFE,
EMFF
LU: 1000km
cycle path
2021
Bed+Bike,
Ecolabel
Attitude -
behaviour gap
Goal: develop
Luxembourg as a
location for eco-
tourismLaw on
sustainable
development in
rural areas
Lack of visitor
management
plans
Luxembourg
Some initiatives in
place but potential for
growth

Realising Nature based Solutions
Questions to you:
• What do you as important nature based solutions in your countries
– existing ones and ones that should be promoted in the future
• What do you see as policy / intervention needed to make it
happen?
• Who should / could make this happen?

Capitalising on the Benefits: Who can do what?
Actor Tools
EU • Implementation
• Integration and funding
National
authorities
• Green roof regulation
• Integration of nature
City authorities • Air quality, climate and green
infrastructure strategies
• Tree planting campaigns
Protected area
managers
• Recruitment: e.g. health wardens
• Training volunteers
Citizens • Citizen science, mobile applications,
guerrilla gardening, advocacy
NGOs • Information provision, advocacy
Science • Research, dedicated mapping and
climatology teams
Private Sector • Pilot projects - e.g. care providers and
partnerships
Improvedcollaborationsforhealth-social-naturesynergies
Out soon !

Conclusions
1. Nature, in all its diversity, provides a wide range of benefits and values to society and
the economy, referred to as natural capital. But nature is more than “just” Natural
capital.
2. A green economy aims to incorporate these values from ecosystem services and
biodiversity into decision-making across all levels of governance – biodiversity proofing
/ mainstreaming.
• Seeking to avoid or minimise trade-offs (green the brown)
• Env benefits through resource efficiency ( green the brown)
• Proactive investment in natural capital (build the green)
3. There are opportunities and risks in transitions to green economies as regards to human
welfare and development -- transition management is critical for success.
4. PA management & Green Infrastructure are at the heart of a green economy transition
5. Integration and policy coherence are important governance solutions
6. A multi-stakeholder approach is critical for progress

Nature in the Transition to a Green Economy
ten Brink et al., 2012
TEEB for National and International Policy Makers
(ed Patrick ten Brink 2011)
TEEB Water and Wetlands
Russi et al., 2012
Guide to Multi-benefits of Cohesion Policy Investments in Nature & GI
IEEP & Milieu 2013
& Book: On Benefits Assessment for Protected Areas
Kettunen & ten Brink (2013)
Social and Economic Benefits of Protected Areas - An Assessment Guide
IEEP is an independent, not-for-profit institute dedicated to the analysis, understanding
and promotion of policies for a sustainable environment. www.ieep.eu.
ptenbrink@ieep.eu
Further information
The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection –
ten Brink, Mutafoglu, Schweitzer J.-P., Kettunen M. et al (2016)
http://www.ieep.eu/assets/2073/Health_and_Social_Benefits_of_Nature_-
_Final_Report_Executive_Summary_sent.pdf

PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017

Ähnlich wie PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017 (20)

Mehr von Institute for European Environmental Policy IEEP

Mehr von Institute for European Environmental Policy IEEP (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

PtB of IEEP on Nature and Green Economy OPERAs to Oxford univ masters 17 March 2017