Comparative case studies
Apart from the twelve deep case studies, BESAFE partners will conduct two comparative studies. The main idea behind these studies is to be able to compare different EU Member States with respect to particular WP 3 and WP 4 research questions. Comparative study “EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 – national implementation” thus addresses the main questions of WP 3, while the study “Perceptions of biodiversity, ecosystem services and values at the national level” is concerned with WP 4 inquiry.

Invasive species strategies; Germany Large mammals in Norwegian wild-lands Water company uses of valuation evidence in investment planning Nested Socio-Ecological Systems in the Romanian Lower Danube River Catchment Public controversies surrounding the return of red fox and wild boar to Flanders, Belgium An underwater tidal electricity turbine; Northern Ireland Bialowieza Forest conflict, Poland National Strategy for Mires and Peatlands; Finland Management plans for the Andalusia national parks; Spain Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Biodiversity Action Plan; UK Long-term management of urban green areas, Finland Implementing the Natura 2000 network, EU level, Europe EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 – national implementation (Comparative case study) Perceptions of biodiversity, ecosystem services and values at the national level (Comparative case study)

EU Biodiversity Strategy 2020 – national implementation

The goal of this study is to identify and analyse differences (and commonalities) of interpretation and argumentation in relation to biodiversity conservation between the EU and national (or regional) governance levels. In particular, the aim is to learn about the argumentation processes at stake in the implementation of EU biodiversity policies and to what consequences for biodiversity conservation this might lead. The issue area will be the EU biodiversity strategy 2020 and its actual transmission into national/regional policy decision-making and implementation. In addition, attention will also be given to the potential role of national/regional level arguments in influencing EU level actions. The main sources of data will be document analysis and semi-structured interviews. The data obtained from the studies in different countries will be gathered in a common format and analysed with regard to finding both common patterns, and distinct approaches to the national implementation of the EU biodiversity policies. By looking at the transfer of arguments from the EU to lower governance level, this study will address particular research questions of WP 3 regarding the linkages through which the transmission of arguments and values between governance levels takes place.

Partner responsible
Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO)

Contact persons

Ann Van Herzele (Ann.vanherzele [at] inbo.be), Gyorgyi Bela (bela.gyorgyi [at] essrg.hu), Dieter Mortelmans (Dieter Mortelmans [at] inbo.be)