Are we natura-lly failing?

Setting land aside for nature is a critical step toward halting biodiversity loss - but is it enough? Across the European Union, the Natura 2000 network is meant to safeguard biodiversity under the Habitats Directive, yet signs of ecological decline persist. The Landscape Ecology Group (Dagmar Haase)took a closer look at how these protected areas are actually performing in Germany. Drawing on data from over 1,000 Natura 2000 sites, they found that just 6% of habitats and 4% of species are in favourable conservation status - far from the goals set by EU legislation. Their analysis reveals that land use, especially agriculture and forestry, continues to weigh heavily on conservation outcomes, though not all practices are equally harmful. Larger sites, earlier protection, and less direct human use were all linked to better results. The takeaway? Designation alone doesn’t deliver biodiversity recovery. Without stronger restoration efforts and better land-use management, the EU’s 30-by-30 vision risks falling short. Their Basic and Applied Ecology Article study sheds light on where and why protection isn’t working - and what it will take to turn that around. You should definitely check it out!

Abstract

The Convention on Biological Diversity aims to protect 30 % of the Earth’s land and marine surface to promote biodiversity. In the European Union, conservation areas are mainly placed under protection through the Habitats Directive. These so-called Natura 2000 sites currently cover 18.6 % of Europe's land area. Obligatory status reports enable a broad-scale analysis of conservation states to investigate if biodiversity is in the favourable conservation status demanded by the directive and which factors may be inhibiting. With focus on Germany, we evaluated the conservation states of habitat types and species groups as assessed in standard data forms and related it to drivers commonly reported for the sites, e.g., land-use practices, protected area size and time since designation. Our results are based on assessments from 23 % (1049) of Germany’s Natura 2000 sites protected under the Habitats Directive and show that only 6 % of habitats’ and 4 % of species’ assessments report a favourable conservation status. A review of the reported drivers showed that most negative influences on Natura 2000 sites were attributed to agricultural and forestry activities, as well as natural system modifications, while for both land-use types also practices with positive impact were listed. For habitats, conservation status was better in Natura 2000 sites that were established earlier than later. For both habitats and species, more favourable conservation states were overall related to larger area sizes and the absence of direct land use (agriculture, forestry). Our results highlight that a high proportion of protected areas alone does not suffice to infer successes for biodiversity conservation when land-use activities continue to affect target species or their habitats. Increased conversation efforts for Natura 2000 areas will be required to meet the goals of the recently implemented EU Nature Restoration Law.