Descrizione 1
Stefania Ercole, Valeria Giacanelli, Alessandra Grignetti, Gabriele La Mesa
The indicator illustrates the conservation status and trends of Italian species protected under Directive 92/43/EEC (Habitats Directive) and is based on the summary results of the 4th Italian report for the period 2013-2018, submitted to the European Commission in 2019. The report covers a total of 349 species (232 animal species and 117 plant species) of Community interest present in our territory and seas. In the 4th report, a total of 337 distribution maps and 619 reporting forms were produced (one for each species in every biogeographical region where it is present). The 2019 assessments show that over half of the terrestrial and inland water species, 54% of the flora, and 53% of the fauna, as well as 22% of the species evaluated in the marine context, have an unfavourable conservation status (inadequate or poor). A comparison between the two most recent reporting periods (2007-2012 and 2013-2018) reveals no improvements in the conservation status of the species. The only positive signal is the increase in knowledge, with a decrease in cases where the conservation status was unknown. The indicator highlights the urgent need for greater commitment to the conservation of species protected by the Habitats Directive, in relation to the target of the European Biodiversity Strategy to 2030, which sets out that at least 30% of species and habitats in unfavourable conservation status should improve their status by 2030 or show at least a trend of improvement.
The indicator illustrates the conservation status and trends of 349 species of community interest present in Italian territory and seas. These include 232 animal species (of which 25 are marine) and 117 plant species (of which 2 are marine), listed in Annexes II, IV, and V of Directive 92/43/EEC (Habitats Directive). The indicator is based on reporting under Article 17, which requires Member States to evaluate every 6 years for each species in each biogeographical region of presence, both the conservation status (indicating whether it is: favourable, inadequate, poor, or unknown) and the trend (indicating whether it is: increasing, stable, decreasing, or unknown) for the reference period. The indicator presents the results of the evaluations produced by Italy in 2019 for the 4th report under Article 17 of the Directive, covering the period 2013-2018, and compares them with the previous evaluations in the 3rd report (2007-2012).
To show the conservation status of Italian species protected by the Habitats Directive, indicate the level of implementation of the Directive, and measure progress toward the targets of the European and National Biodiversity Strategies.
The Habitats Directive is one of the key pillars of the EU’s nature conservation policy, transposed into Italian law in 1997 through Presidential Decree No. 357 of September 8, 1997 (G.U. October 23, 1997, No. 248, S.O.). The objective of the Directive is to "safeguard biodiversity by conserving natural habitats, as well as wild flora and fauna in the European territory of the Member States to which the Treaty applies" (Article 2). To achieve this goal, the Directive establishes measures to ensure the maintenance or restoration of a Favourable Conservation Status (FCS) for the habitats and species listed in its annexes. The Directive also sets out rules for monitoring and submitting national reports on the implementation of its provisions (Articles 11 and 17). The European Biodiversity Strategy to 2030 also includes specific commitments related to the conservation status of species and habitats of community interest, particularly requiring that there be no deterioration in conservation status, and that at least 30% of species/habitats with an unfavourable conservation status reach FCS by 2030, or at least show a trend of improvement.
Descrizione 2
EC, 2020, ‘EU biodiversity strategy for 2030’ European Commission (https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/biodiversity-strategy-2030_en) EC, 2021, ‘Habitats Directive reporting’ European Commission (https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/knowledge/rep_habitats/index_en.htm) EEA, 2020, State of nature in the EU - Results from reporting under the nature directives 2013-2018, EEA Report No 10/2020, European Environment Agency (https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/state-of-nature-in-the-eu-2020) Ercole S., Angelini P., Carnevali L., Casella L., Giacanelli V., Grignetti A., La Mesa G., Nardelli R., Serra L., Stoch F., Tunesi L., Genovesi P. (ed.), 2021. Rapporti Direttive Natura (2013-2018). Sintesi dello stato di conservazione delle specie e degli habitat di interesse comunitario e delle azioni di contrasto alle specie esotiche di rilevanza unionale in Italia. ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files2021/pubblicazioni/rapporti/rapporto-349_2021_direttive_natura_def.pdf Ercole S., Giacanelli V., Bacchetta G., Fenu G., Genovesi P. (Eds.), 2016. Manuali per il monitoraggio di specie e habitat di interesse comunitario (Direttiva 92/43/CEE) in Italia: specie vegetali. ISPRA, Serie Manuali e linee guida, 140/2016. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/public_files/direttiva-habitat/Manuale-140-2016.pdf ETC/BD, 2020, State of nature in the EU Methodological paper:Methodologies under the nature directives reporting 2013-2018 and analysis for the state of nature 2000, Technical Paper No 2/2020, European Environment Agency European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity (https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-bd/products/etc-bd-reports/etc-bd-technical-paper-2-2020-state-of-nature-in-the-eu-methodological-paper-methodologies-under-the-nature-directives-reporting-2013-2018-and-analysis-for-the-state-of-nature-2000) La Mesa G., Paglialonga A., Tunesi L., 2019. Manuali per il monitoraggio di specie e habitat di interesse comunitario (Direttiva 92/43/CEE e Direttiva 09/147/CE) in Italia: ambiente marino. ISPRA, Serie Manuali e linee guida, 190/2019. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files2019/pubblicazioni/manuali-linee-guida/MLG_190_19.pdf Stoch F., Genovesi P.(Eds.), 2016. Manuali per il monitoraggio di specie e habitat di interesse comunitario (Direttiva 92/43/CEE) in Italia: specie animali. ISPRA, Serie Manuali e linee guida, 141/2016. https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/public_files/direttiva-habitat/Manuale-141-2016.pdf
The limitations are due to the heterogeneity in the level of knowledge across different Italian administrative regions, the scarcity of long-term ad hoc monitoring plans. Another limitation arises from the need to use expert judgment for evaluations in the art 17 report,, both due to a lack of data and the presence of parameters that are difficult to interpret and quantify (e.g., favorable reference values).
Implementing coordination among all stakeholders, setting up ad hoc monitoring plans, harmonizing field methodologies and improving the quality of collected data.
Qualificazione dati
Downloadable data and documents from the Central Data Repository of the European Environment Agency (EEA). Results IV Italian report and related comments available in ISPRA volume, Reports Series 349/2021.
National
2007-2012, 2013-2018
Qualificazione indicatore
Under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, each Member State must provide a biogeographical national assessment of the conservation status (CS) of all species of community interest in its territory every 6 years. In Italy, the data must be collected by regions and autonomous provinces according to methodologies shared at the national level (Ercole et al., 2016; Stoch and Genovesi, 2016; La Mesa et al., 2019). ISPRA coordinates the drafting and the finalization of the report ex art.17 on behalf of MiTE, which formally submits it to the European Commission at the end of each cycle.
The overall CS of a species in a specific biogeographical region is derived through an assessment process that uses data on four parameters: range, population, habitat for the species, and future prospects. In our country, the biogeographical regions are: Alpine (ALP), Continental (CON), Mediterranean (MED), and Mediterranean marine (MMED). The overall conservation status is indicated as: favourable (FV), unfavourable-inadequate (U1), unfavourable-bad (U2), or unknown (XX).
The overall trend of a species in a biogeographical region is based on the trend of three parameters: range, population, and habitat for the species. The trend is expressed as: increasing, stable, decreasing, or unknown.
Complete information on the methodologies for reporting under Article 17 is available in documents downloadable from the European Commission's website.
The reporting follows a standardized methodology that allows for comparisons between successive cycles. Changes in CS can be in terms of deterioration when the CS has worsened, or improvement in cases where the CS has advanced toward a more positive situation (from U1 to FV, from U2 to U1), or stability when no changes in the conservation status occurred between the two reporting cycles. In some cases, comparisons cannot be made due to new knowledge, resulting in new assessments, taxonomic revisions, or splits between the reports, which have led to changes in the species checklists reported.
The overall conservation status of species is poor, with the following values of species being in an unfavourable CS (U-inadequate + U-bad, Figure 1):
-54% of terrestrial and inland water flora (13% of which in bad status),
-53% of terrestrial and inland water fauna (17% of which in bad status),
-22% of marine species (17% of which in bad status).
Furthermore, a significant 39% of species still have an unknown CS. The target set by the Habitats Directive to achieve a favourable CS for all species in the national territory is considered unmet and not achievable in the short term.
The trend is negative as there are no improvements in the conservation status of species from 2013 to 2019. The percentage of cases in unfavourable conservation status (UCS) increased between the 3rd and 4th reports, both for terrestrial and inland water fauna and flora, with values ranging from 50% to 54% (Figure 2). Additionally, in the results of the 4th report (2013-2018), there were no significant percentages of overall trends showing an increase, with most trends being stable or deteriorating (Figure 3, Table 2).
Dati
Table 1 - Number of species reported in the last Italian Article 17 report and related reporting forms and distribution maps (2019)
ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021
Table 2 - Conservation status and trend: number of cases in different combinations of overall SC and overall trend at the biogeographic region and national level (2019) for plant (2a) and animal (2b) terrestrial and inland water species
ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021
Categories Conservation Status: favorable, inadequate, poor, unknown, and unrated. Trend Categories: increasing, stable, decreasing, unknown and not evaluated. Biogeographical regions: alpine (ALP), continental (CON), Mediterranean (MED)
Figure 1: Conservation Status (SC) of Italian species of community interest emerged in the Fourth Report under Article 17 (period 2013-2018, delivery 2019)
ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021
Figure 2: Conservation status (SC) of Italian species of community interest: comparison between III Report (2013) and IV Report (2019)
ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021
Figure 3: Changes in Conservation Status between III report (2013) and IV report (2019) for plant (3a) and animal (3b) terrestrial and inland water species and marine species (3c)
ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021
The indicator presents the results of the most recent Italian report under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, covering the period 2013-2018, which was submitted to the European Commission in 2019. This report accounted for 349 Italian species of Community interest, including 322 terrestrial and inland water species and 27 marine species (Table 1). To fill in the reporting formats, create distribution maps, and assess the conservation status (CS) of each species in each biogeographical region of presence, a large volume of data was collected and processed. A total of 337 maps and 619 reporting formats, were produced (Table 1).
The 4th report highlights critical conditions for many Italian species of Community interest, which are in an unfavourable conservation status (inadequate + bad, Figure 1):
-54% of terrestrial and inland water flora (13% in bad status),
-53% of terrestrial and inland water fauna (17% in bad status),
-22% of marine species (17% in bad status).
These results are consistent with those from the previous reporting cycle (2007-2012), with percentages of species in an unfavourable CS in the 4th report being slightly higher than in the 3rd report, both for flora (from 50% in 2013 to 54% in 2019) and for terrestrial and inland water fauna (from 51% to 53%) (Figure 2). In the marine context, compared to the 3rd report, there was an improvement in knowledge, with a decrease in cases with unknown CS from 50% in 2013 to 39% in 2019, although this percentage is still quite high. The CS was found to be inadequate for Caretta caretta, bad for Pinna nobilis, and Scyllarides latus.
Therefore, no significant improvements in CS were observed from 2013 to 2019. The only positive sign is the improvement in knowledge, with a general decrease in cases with unknown CS, particularly evident for plant species(from 16% in 2013 to 3% in 2019). Figure 3 allows for an analysis of the changes in CS between the 3rd and 4th reports.
For plant species, CS remained stable in 62% of cases (Figure 3a), which includes both those where CS remained favourable (43 cases) and those where CS remained unfavourable (55 cases, of which 10 with U1 and 45 with U2). A deterioration in CS was observed in 12 cases, most of which were in the Mediterranean region, which generally shows a more critical situation compared to other biogeographical regions. Positive signals include the increase in knowledge that led to new assessments in 23% of cases and the improvement of CS in 8% of cases (13 cases, of which 9 moved from unfavourable to favourable, and 4 from U2 to U1, with unfavourable conditions remaining but less severe).
For animal species, the analysis of changes in conservation status (Figure 3b) shows a high percentage of cases in which there were no changes (62%) compared to the assessment of the previous period (2007-2012). Improvement cases (11%) are mostly related to invertebrates and mammals, while deterioration cases (11%) mainly involve amphibians and reptiles; no deterioration was detected among fish, although they still maintain an unfavourable CS. For fauna, 5% of the cases show an increase in knowledge, related to species for which the CS was either not evaluated or was unknown in the 3rd report. Finally, the percentage of unassessable changes (11%) is mainly due to the introduction of new species or changes in taxonomic status that prevented comparisons between the two reporting cycles.
For marine species, the comparison between the last two reporting periods (Figure 3c), shows that the CS changed for one-third of the species, partly due to an increase in knowledge (3 mammals, which moved from an unknown to a favourable status). Improvement was recorded for two invertebrate species, while a deterioration was observed for Pinna nobilis, which suffered a mass mortality event due to a species-specific pathogen affecting the species throughout the Mediterranean Sea. For the remaining species, the conservation status remained stable (28%) or no comparisons could be made (39%), as in the case of two algae species, which were only reported in the 4th report.
The trend situation in the 4th report (Table 2) is also negative.For terrestrial and inland water plant with inadequate CS, in 29 cases the trend is decreasing, in 27 cases it is stable, and in only 1 case is it increasing; for those with bad CS, there is a clear prevalence of decreasing trends (16 cases out of 21), only 4 cases with stable trends, and none with increasing trends (Table 2, Section 2a). For species with favourable CS, trends are mostly stable (67 cases out of 69).
A similar situation is recorded for terrestrial and inland water animal with favourable CS, which also show 80% of cases with stable trends and only slightly more than 19% of cases with increasing trends. Unfortunately, decreasing trends prevail for species assessed with inadequate and bad CS (Table 2, Section 2b).
For a comprehensive review of the results of the 4th report under Article 17 and the related comments, please refer to ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 349/2021.
The results clearly shows the urgent need for greater commitment to the conservation of Italian species protected under the Habitats Directive, also to achieve the target set by the European and Italian Biodiversity Strategies to ensure that at least 30% of species and habitats in unsatisfactory conservation status improve their status by 2030, or show at least a clear positive trend.