life-nature: communicating with stakeholders and...

L I F E I I I

European Commission

LIFE-Nature:communicating with stakeholdersand the general public

Best practice examples for Natura 2000

European CommissionEnvironment Directorate General

LIFE-Focus is the journal of the LIFE III programme (2000–2004).

LIFE (“L’Instrument Financier pour l’Environnement” / The Financing Instrument for the Environment) is a European Commissionprogramme administered by the LIFE Unit of the Directorate-General for the Environment.

The content of LIFE Focus does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions of the European Union.

Author: Kerstin Sundseth, Ecosystems LTD. Managing editor: Bruno Julien, European Commission, Environment DG, LIFE Unit– BU-9 02/1 200 rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels. LIFE focus series coordinator: Federico Nogara, LIFE Unit. The followingpeople have contributed to this issue::::: Isabel Lourenco- de Faria, Giovanni Gordiani, Joanna Ingles, Nicholas Hanley, ConchaOlmeda, Britta Kuper, Anton Gazenbeek, John Houston, Mats Eriksson, Keijo Taskinen, Oliviero Spinelli, Alberto Zocchi, MarcThauront, Marc Maury, Ana Guimaraes, Nadine Mezard, Lea Wongsoredjo. Acknowledgements::::: thanks to all LIFE-Naturebeneficiaries who have contributed comments, photos and other useful material for this report. Cover photos::::: Archiv der AbteilungUmweltschutz, Amt der Tiroler Landesregierung; Jurma Luhta; Spanish Cetacean Society, SEC; Lee Valley Regional Park Authority.Graphic design and layout::::: Peter Creed, The NatureBureau, UK. This issue of LIFE focus is published in English with a printrun of 5000. It can be downloaded from the Life website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/life/home.htm

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answersto your questions about the European Union

New freephone number:00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through theEuropa server (http://europa.eu.int).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004

ISBN 92-894-7898-5ISSN 1725-5619

© European Communities, 2004Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Belgium

Printed on recycled paper

European CommissionLIFE Focus / LIFE-Nature: communicating with stakeholders and the general public – Best practice examples forNatura 2000

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

2004 – 72 pp – 21 x 28 cmISBN 92-894-7898-5ISSN 1725-5619

LIFE Focus LIFE-Nature: Good practices on communication

Foreword by the European Landowners Association .......................................................................... p. iiPurpose of this report ........................................................................................................................ p. iv

PART ONE: ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Natura 2000 Network .................................................................................................................. p.2Natura 2000 – putting people at the heart of the process .............................................................. p.3Current perceptions of Natura 2000 ................................................................................................. p.4

Overview of communication activities in LIFE-Nature projects ....................................................... p.6LIFE-Nature: good governance in practice ...................................................................................... p.7Working in partnership ....................................................................................................................... p.8Communication activities funded under LIFE-Nature .................................................................... p.10Awareness raising activities ............................................................................................................ p.11

Good practice recommendations for communicating on Natura 2000 ........................................... p.12Why is it important to communicate on Natura 2000? .................................................................... p.13Who should we be communicating with? ...................................................................................... p.15Key messages on Natura 2000? ..................................................................................................... p.17Developing a communication strategy ........................................................................................... p.19What techniques to use? ................................................................................................................. p.20Difficulties in communicating about nature and Natura 2000 ....................................................... p.22Practical advice for LIFE-Nature projects ....................................................................................... p.24

PART TWO: LIFE-NATURE PROJECT EXAMPLES

LIFE-Nature examples of communicating with stakeholders .......................................................... p.28

LIFE-Nature examples of communicating with other public bodies ............................................... p.44

LIFE-Nature examples of communicating with the general public ................................................. p.48

ANNEXES

Annex 1: Commission’s communication activities on Natura 2000 ............................................... p.66

Annex 2: Reference list of LIFE-Nature projects featured as case studies in this report ............... p.67


LIFE’s objectives are to encourageproper communication on Natura2000 and to develop solutions in thefield. LIFE-Nature, even if everyonehas not understood its needs sinceits early origins, becomes a clear toolnot only for going into the heart ofNatura 2000’s issue operating at thelevel of the individual sites but alsofor bringing together landowners, landusers and stakeholders, inviting themto find sustainable, balanced and con-sensual solutions for their specificmanagement problems.

After already ten years of existence,LIFE is entering into a more intensivephase, paving the way of the prepa-ration of management plans forNatura 2000 sites, looking for broadpartnership and inputs from the dif-ferent landowners and users.

This principle of collaboration is en-shrined in the Habitats Directive, re-quiring that conservation measurestake account of the economic, socialand cultural requirements as well asthe regional and local characteristicsof the area.

Natura 2000 affects part of a livinglandscape, much of Europe’s naturaldiversity has been developed throughthe centuries by human beings.

As there is a clear fear from the us-ers’ side that Natura 2000 could af-fect their livelihoods and restrict theiractivities, they should be able to findin the examples provided by LIFE-Nature an answer to their anxiety asthe projects have to pave the way forNational or Regional Governmentsproviding them good examples andinviting them not to be burdensomeover regulating.

The manner in which Natura 2000 willbe implemented is very important –the involvement of the owner of pri-vate land is crucial. LIFE shows thatcontracts are preferable to con-

Forewordby the European Landowners Association

straints. There seems to be a myththat private economic land use prac-tices have in principle a negative im-pact on nature. However this is quiteoften the contrary as conservation ishighly dependent on the continuedactive management of the sites andimplementing LIFE has demonstratedhow much can be learned from thepractical experience.

One of LIFE’s achievements is toshow that cooperation leads to newopportunities for rural areas and thatat the end of the day, when actors arereally concerned by nature, as mostof the landowners are (it’s their valu-able asset), there is no objection toapplying solutions favourable forbiodiversity, if this was not already thecase.

Because LIFE-Nature is designed tohelp to establish the network anddemonstrate how it may function inpractice, it is indeed open to every-one. It is regrettable that private ac-tors haven’t made sufficient use of itin the past as LIFE-Nature really mayhelp to resolve existing issues onNatura 2000 (for well-known reasons).

Its bottom-up approach is a key fac-tor in determining sustainable solu-tions to be found at site level in closeagreement with landowners and us-ers. This reduces conflicts and helpsto develop a shared vision for thelong-term management of sites andto identify opportunities and promotemeasures to help put these into prac-tice for the benefit of all. Another ad-vantage is to promote partnershipgiving the different socio-economicpartners an opportunity to build up asense of trust and mutual understand-ing.

Finally, LIFE giving life to Natura 2000by providing model examples, invitesMember States and Regions to applythe Natura 2000 regulation cautiously:whilst a level of regulation is neces-

LIFE Focus LIFE-Nature: Good practices on communication p. iii

sary to ensure that basic standardsare met, there should be reluctanceto introduce burdensome regulationprohibiting all activities in the Natura2000 areas.

By its examples, LIFE demonstratesclearly that overall prohibitions are notthe purpose of the Network. On thecontrary, there is a great need for flex-ibility in order not only to maintain butalso to enhance nature conservationand its biodiversity. Doing so, LIFEgains trust and confidence in favourof the initiative as rural actors feel thatthey are invited to make a real contri-bution and not just being “heard out”.

To engage private landowners on con-servation activities and recognize thefact that they are contributing to na-ture conservation is bridging a gapbetween various stakeholders andpublic authorities. In doing so, it is in-dicating the direction that must bepursued.

A good example of this evolution isthe Natura Networking Initiative in-volving in a consortium of organisa-tion Eurosite, Europarc and theEuropean Landowners’ Organization.

LIFE-Nature preparing managementplans for Natura 2000 sites, develop-ing best practices experiences, coor-dinating actions for endangeredspecies across the EU, involving allthe actors of rural society, and open-ing a window for Natura 2000 is a cru-cial tool for fulfilling the target ofGöteborg: halting the decline ofbiodiversity.

LIFE is already by itself quite anachievement. Addressing itself to abroader public of stakeholders andencouraging landowners and land us-ers to play their role, to share theirachievements for nature conservationand to involve themselves in the de-velopment of more than just modelexamples allows us to say that LIFE

paves the way for a broad socio-eco-nomic and environmental consensus.

This publication puts into evidencethe need to communicate LIFE’sprojects and their good examples inorder to take part usefully and activelyto the demands of Natura 2000.

It is our belief that the future of Eu-rope’s countryside is dependent onthe individual management decisionsof its millions of actors and privatelandowners. Their future depends oninnovation, value creation and en-hancement of biodiversity. This book-let shows us how LIFE is a tool forbridging the gaps and building coop-eration between public authorities,NGO’s, private owners and economicactors.

Therefore, we warmly welcome thispublication.

Thierry de l’Escaille


Purpose of this reportFor the past ten years the EuropeanCommission’s LIFE-Nature fund hasbeen assisting in the establishmentof the Natura 2000 Network, – aEuropean network of sites designedto protect Europe’s rich and diversenatural heritage.

Around €558 million has been spentso far on co-financing practical con-servation projects in over 1800 sitesacross Europe, representing 10% ofthe network.

Through this comes a wealth ofpractical experiences and knowledgeon implementing Natura 2000 whichcan be of use to others involvedin conservation management and,indeed, in land use policies generally.

In this report we focus specifically onLIFE-Nature’s experiences of com-municating with different stakeholdergroups and the general public inorder to gain acceptance and supportfor Natura 2000.

Considering that the Natura 2000Network is set to cover almost afifth of the European territory andtouch the lives of many sectors ofsociety, the need for communicationcannot be stressed enough. It isfundamental to the success of Natura2000.

Unfortunately, to date, so much atten-tion has been focused on selectingsites for the Network that few have hadthe chance to explain what Natura2000 means in practice for the peopleconcerned. The result is that somestakeholder groups feel alienatedfrom the process and – in the absenceof an open forum for dialogue – fearthe worst.

Yet their concerns are likely to belargely unfounded. There is no doubtthat people will continue to live andwork in Natura 2000 sites and mostwill require only minor adjustments tocurrent land use practices to ensurethey are compatible with the speciesand habitats present.

What is more, the scale of Natura 2000is such that in some cases it canbecome a powerful ally for rural areasacross Europe, providing opportuni-ties for increased inward investmentand economic diversification throughpositive management.

The general public, too, stands to gainthanks to the fact that Natura 2000 canprovide them with greater opportuni-ties for enjoying and discovering ‘their’rich and diverse nature.

Thus, in contrast to the more classicnature reserves of the past – Natura2000 is essentially about ‘people innature’ rather than ‘nature withoutpeople’. Everyone should thereforefeel a sense of shared ownership andresponsibility towards this importantpan-European initiative.

For this to happen however therehas to be good communication at alllevels. People need to be fully inform-ed about the aims of Natura 2000 andactively involved in decisions over thefuture management of the sites. Notonly will this help to dispel unfoundedfears and mis-perceptions but itshould also help to incite interest andactive collaboration from differentsectors of society.

The LIFE-Nature projects have dem-onstrated time and again that the levelof acceptance and interest in Natura2000 increases in direct proportion tothe level of time and effort spent oncommunication. And, as alwayswith LIFE, it is on the basis of suchpractical experiences that solutionsare found which can then be appliedelsewhere.

The purpose of this report is threefold:

> The first objective is to providean overview of the key issuesrelating to communicating onNatura 2000. This is presented insection one which looks at cur-rent perceptions of Natura 2000,the type of communication activi-ties funded under LIFE-Nature

and the reasons why communi-cation is so important.

> The second objective is to pro-vide a series of practical LIFE-Nature examples of successfulcommunication techniques usedby LIFE projects to communicatewith different interest groups (part2).

> The final objective is to offersome basic guidelines and prac-tical advice on how to communi-cate effectively on Natura 2000with different audiences, based onthe LIFE experiences. This is pre-sented in chapter 3 of the report(page 16–26).

The overall ambition of the report isto inspire each and everyone, LIFE-Nature projects included, to commu-nicate better and more effectivelyabout Natura 2000 in order to raisethe profile and level of understand-ing of this important network.

Only then can the discussions aboutthe future management of Natura2000 move into the realm of aninformed debate and away from theinstinctively negative perceptions thatcurrently prevail. Once this is done,a wealth of new opportunities shouldopen up for all sectors of society toderive some benefit from Natura 2000through greater cooperation, newpartnerships and increased access.

As for nature, Natura 2000 offers aunique opportunity to conserveEurope’s diverse and rare habitatsand species across their naturalrange, irrespective of national orpolitical boundaries. Such an oppor-tunity cannot be missed if man andnature are to cohabit in harmony andif development is to progress in asustainable manner that safeguardsour rich natural heritage.

PART ONEANALYSIS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

LIFE Focus LIFE-Nature: Good practices on communication p. 1


The Natura 2000 NetworkThe Natura 2000 Network is expected to cover almost a fifth of the EU territory. It is the most

ambitious undertaking yet to safeguard Europe’s rare and threatened habitats and species. The

sheer scale of the Network means that it must remain an integral part of a living landscape in

which people are at the heart of the process rather than on the periphery.

Natura 2000’s contribution toglobal biodiversity

The Natura 2000 Network came intoexistence in 1992 through the adop-tion of the Habitats Directive which,together with the Birds Directive1 ,forms the cornerstone of Europe’snature conservation policy. It re-sponds to the commitment made byEurope’s Heads of State and Govern-ment at their Spring Summit inGothenburg in 2001 to ‘halt the lossof biodiversity by 2010’ and is animportant part of Europe’s responseto conserving global biodiversity inline with international obligationsunder the Biodiversity Convention.

1 Natura 2000 is established through CouncilDirective 92/43/EEC of May 21 1992 on the con-servation of natural habitats and of wild faunaand flora, and Council Directive 79/409/EEC ofApril 2 1979 on the conservation of wild birds

Pho

to ©

Jur

ma

Luht

aP

hoto

© Z

solt

Kal

otás

Pho

to ©

Arc

turo

s

Biogeographicalregions

AlpineAtlanticBorealContinentalMacaronesiaMediterraneanPannonian

The Natura 2000 Network p. 3

Natura 2000 – putting people at the heart of the process

Natura 2000 has to be one of mostambitious initiatives ever launched toprotect Europe’s rich and diversenatural heritage. Responding to thegrowing concern of Europeans overthe rapid loss of their wildlife, it setsout to create an extensive network ofprotected areas across the EuropeanUnion to conserve its rare speciesand habitats.

So far, some 18,000 sites have beenproposed for the Natura 2000 Net-work, covering almost a fifth of theEuropean territory – an area equiva-lent to the size of Germany and Italyput together.

With the recent enlargement of theEU, this coverage is likely to extendeven further. Not only do the newMember States have a rich bio-diversity of their own, but they alsoharbour species and habitats thathave almost disappeared from therest of Europe.

It is this European dimension that setsNatura 2000 apart from previousefforts to conserve nature in Europe.For the first time, all 25 Member Statesare working together towards thesame goal and within the same stronglegislative framework (i.e. the Habitatsand Birds Directives) to protect andmanage vulnerable species andhabitats across their natural range,irrespective of national or politicalboundaries. As such, the networkshould add up to substantially morethan the sum of its parts.

The other distinguishing feature ofNatura 2000 is that it puts people atthe heart of the process rather thanon its periphery. This principle ofcollaboration is enshrined in theHabitats Directive, which requiresthat conservation measures ‘takeaccount of the economic, social andcultural requirements and the regionaland local characteristics of the area’.

It also follows the principle of goodgovernance which advocates greaterparticipation and openness inshaping and delivering EU policies.

This breaks with the more traditionaltop-down approach of classic naturereserves, where people weretolerated rather than integrated.Natura 2000 is in fact more aboutsaying ‘take note – this is ourcommon heritage’ rather than ‘keepout – this is for wildlife not people’.

Such an approach has manyadvantages, both for natureconservation and for people livingand working in rural areas. By activelyassociating different stake-holders inthe management and implementationof Natura 2000 sites, many vulnerablesemi-natural habitats and specieswhich are dependent upon positivemanagement will be maintained. Bythe same token, the sheer scale ofNatura 2000 should make it apowerful ally in maintaining theeconomic viability and social fabricof many rural areas.

This can bring new opportunities foreconomic diversification and inwardinvestment, for instance through theEU’s Regional policy and RuralDevelopment Programme. Recentdiscussions over the reform of theCommon Agricultural Policy and thenew financial perspectives for theCommunity Budget post-2006, forinstance, attach increasing import-ance to this potential synergybetween nature conservation and themaintenance of dynamic rural areas.

All of this, however, requires aconcerted effort in communication, asmuch at the local level as at theEuropean level and across all sectorsand interest groups.

Europe: a living landscape

Semi-natural habitats are often as important in biodiversity terms as naturalhabitats. They characterise much of Europe’s landscape but it is only whencomparing different regions of Europe that one begins to appreciate theirsheer scale and diversity. The Spanish dehesas, Irish machairs, Austrianmountain hay meadows or Hungarian steppes, for instance, are all unique totheir regions. Intensively managed cornfields and enriched grasslands on theother hand look pretty much the same wherever they are in Europe.Unfortunately, the latter is increasingly common place, and is often establishedat the expense of the traditional semi natural landscapes.

Pho

to ©

Chr

isto

ph A

sche

mei

er

Shepherding in the moors and heath of west Münster.


Current perceptions of Natura 2000

Stakeholder attitudes towards Natura 2000 in the Baltic States

A recent opinion poll in the Baltic States on the knowledge and attitude of keystakeholder groups (farmers, foresters, fishermen, local administrations andNGOs) towards Natura 2000 concludes that ‘in general, it can be seen that theacceptance of Natura 2000 grows along with the level of detailed and factualknowledge people have about it. Not enough information leads to a verynegative and suspicious attitude as it creates an instinctive rather than anobjective reaction’.

Management of coastal meadows in Estonia

Pho

to ©

Vol

dem

ar R

anna

p

Up to now most efforts relating toNatura 2000 have concentrated onselecting sites for the Network. Thescale of this work was unprecedent-ed. Many countries had to launchnationwide surveys and biologicalinventories which mobilised much ofthe scientific community and mono-polised most of the national conserv-ation authorities’ time.

This selection process is now finallyreaching an end. Community lists ofNatura 2000 sites have so far beenadopted for 2 of the 6 biogeograph-ical regions and the remainder is dueby the end of 2004, together with theadditional contributions from the tennew Member States.

With so much attention focused onchoosing sites for Natura 2000, fewcountries had the time to initiate aproactive awareness raising campaignto explain what Natura 2000 actuallymeans in practice for those involved.Many conservation authorities also feltthat it might be premature to start upa dialogue until the Network was com-plete.

This lack of early communication hashowever created a number of prob-lems. It has, for instance, alienatedcertain stakeholder groups and,sometimes, created a general air ofsuspicion or even resentment towardsNatura 2000. In France, Finland andparts of Germany major campaignswere launched against Natura 2000during the 1990s in response to fearsthat Natura 2000 would affect theirlivelihoods and restrict their activities.

The trouble is that, in the absence ofany evidence to the contrary or oppor-tunities for dialogue, the concern thatNatura 2000 ‘prevents development’will continue to prevail – spurred onby a vocal minority and a few high pro-file cases in the European press.

In reality though, these concerns arelikely to be largely unfounded.

How do Czech land owners perceive Natura 2000?

In a recent opinion poll undertaken in the Czech Republic by the RegionalEnvironmental Centre, landowners were asked to identify what they saw asthe most problematic issues arising from creating a network of protectedareas under Natura 2000 in the Czech Republic.

These were the findings:> 34% were concerned that Natura 2000 would mean restricting and regu-

lating activities, how would their activities be safeguarded?> 20% considered that it would be difficult to harmonise the interests of

nature with actual management and the land owners needs, how will agree-ments be reached with all landowners, what if someone doesn’t agree?

> 20% considered that finance was the key issue. Without this it would not bepossible to preserve or protect nature

> 9% were concerned about who would be in charge of supervising the net-work, what kind of sanctions will be imposed, how can corruption be avoided

> 9% were worried about out-siders not respecting theconditions – e.g. illegal dump-ing, trespassing, co-operationwith other neighbouring landowners so as not to feel isolatedby being in Natura 2000

> 8% were concerned about thelevel of bureaucracy involved,too many rules and regulations,authorities disinclined to be ofservice.

www.natura2000.cz

Pho

to ©

UK

lim

esto

ne p

avem

ents

LIF

E p

roje

ct

Wallonia’s publicity campaign forNatura 2000

As in many countries, Natura 2000 was initiallypoorly understood by Belgian stakeholders andwas largely unknown to the general public. TheWallonian Government decided therefore tolaunch a high profile media campaign on Natura2000. Full-page spreads appeared in main-stream newspapers, publicity spots were madeon national radio and TV and high profile eventsand open days were organised to encouragepeople to visit their local Natura 2000 sites.

So far the campaign looks to be achieving isobjectives very effectively. Not only has Natura2000 become a familiar term in manyWallonian households but it has alsoincited active interest in finding outmore about ‘their’ nature. Stake-holders too have become more opento dialogue and discussion over thefuture management of these sites.

The way in which the campaign has beenimplemented has been central to its success. Themessages used were positive, inclusive, under-standable to all and focused on building trustand confidence. They also gave Natura2000 an easily recognisable identity inthe form of a cartoon character –Mr Natura 2000 – who appeared on allthe publicity materials and at events.

The Natura 2000 Network p. 5

People will continue to earn a livingfrom farming, forestry, fishing,hunting etc… in Natura 2000 sitesand most will only need to makeminor adjustments to current land-use practices to ensure they arecompatible with the needs of thespecies and habitats present. Theyalso ignore the potential added valueof Natura 2000 in terms of recreation,quality of life, tourism and naturalproducts etc….

With the benefit of hindsight, bothMember States and the EuropeanCommission recognise that moremight have been done early on to pre-empt the negative reactions to Natura2000.

That is why, in May 2002, all 25 EUcountries signed the El TeideDeclaration to emphasise their

commitment in promoting greaterawareness and understanding ofNatura 2000 and involving stake-holders in decisions over the longterm management of the sites.

This Declaration came at a crucialturning point in the history of Natura2000 as efforts began to shift awayfrom designation towards that ofimplementation and management.

In this respect, LIFE-Nature projectscan play an important role indemonstrating how communicationbetween different sectors of societycan work in practice and how this canlead to tangible results for the longterm management of Natura 2000sites, based on cooperation andmutual understanding.

Having operated so far on over 10%of the sites included in the Natura2000 Network, these projects providea useful test bed for gauging people’sreactions to Natura 2000 and offer awealth of practical examples acrossEurope of cooperation with differentstakeholder groups and the generalpublic under a wide range of socio-economic circumstances.

Their overwhelming conclusion is thateffective dialogue does almostinvariably increase the level ofacceptance and support for Natura2000. The aim of this report is toexplore how this was achieved andto pass on such best practiceexperiences to others involved inmanaging and implementing Natura2000.

http://natura2000.wallonie.be


LIFE-Nature projects have operatedon over 10% of the sites in the Natura2000 Network, under a wide range ofcircumstances and socio-economicconditions. They therefore provide aninvaluable source of examples ofcommunicating with different sectorsof society on Natura 2000.

The overwhelming conclusion fromthe 700 projects funded so far is thatattitudes can, and really do, changeonce a concerted effort is made toexplain Natura 2000 to local interestgroups and involve them in decisionsabout the subsequent managementof the sites.

Overview of communication activitiesin LIFE-Nature projects

Pho

to ©

Eer

o Va

pa

One of the most effective ways of showing people what Natura 2000 means in practice and winning

their support is to present them with practical real-life examples of Natura 2000 in action.

This is not to say the process iswithout difficulties, or doesn’t sufferfrom the occasional impasse, but thelevel of success generally increasesin proportion to the time and effortspent in planning their communicationwork.

The advantage of LIFE-Nature is thatit adopts a bottom up approach.Projects are able to operate at the levelof the individual sites themselveswhich puts the beneficiaries – be theypublic authorities, NGOs or stake-holder groups – in direct contact withthe people that are most likely to beaffected by Natura 2000.

It also provides them with thenecessary resources to initiatediscussions on the future manage-ment of the sites and to suggestimprovements in existing legislativepractices and instruments.

As such, LIFE-Nature opens a‘window’ onto Natura 2000 and offersa wealth of successful experienceson raising awareness and engagingstakeholders.

Adopted at the same time as theHabitats Directive in 1992, the LIFE-Nature component of the LIFEprogramme is designed to help fundthe conservation of habitat types andspecies listed in the Habitats andBirds Directives, particularly in Natura2000 areas.

The intention is not to pay for theimplementation of the Natura 2000Network wholesale (this wouldrequire much more money) but to helpestablish the network and demon-strate how it can function in practice.

Thus, in many respects LIFE-Naturefollows the principles of goodgovernance, by encouraging greaterparticipation and openness inshaping and delivering EU policies.

Particular importance is attached toengaging local stakeholders in thedifferent project activities, forinstance, by encouraging partner-ships between them within theframework of the project.

LIFE-Nature: good governance in practice

Pho

to ©

Jun

ta d

e A

ndal

ucia

Stakeholder workshop onresponsible hunting.

LIFE-Nature projects also bridge thegap between European policy makingand local implementation by estab-lishing a direct link between theCommission, the Member States andthe local actors.

Overview of communication activities in LIFE-Nature projects p. 7

Through LIFE-Nature, the Commis-sion becomes more than a simpleco-financier. It takes on the role ofa partner in its own right, helpingto implement Natura 2000 acrossthe EU.

Ten key strengths of LIFE-Nature projects

1. Adopts a bottom-up approach to Natura 20002. Functions at the level of the individual sites3. Provides a framework for working in partnership with other interest

groups4. Mobilises interest in Natura 2000 at local level5. Develops sustainable solutions for the long-term management of sites6. Demonstrates how these solutions can be put into practice in

cooperation with local interest groups7. Pump primes the use of other long term funds such as Rural

Development Programme and agri-environment schemes8. Develops best practice experience on conservation management

practices9. Promotes an exchange of experiences and networking between projects10. Brings a sense of pride to an area that has received EU funds for their

nature.


Working in partnership

LIFE-Nature is open to everyone –from national, regional and localauthorities, NGOs, stakeholders andinterest groups, to other public bodiesand even private enterprises.

The majority of the beneficiarieshowever tend to be either publicauthorities who have the ultimateresponsibility for ensuring that Natura2000 is implemented (72%) andconservation NGOs who have muchof the practical know-how andexpertise (27%) on species andhabitat management.

This diversity has enabled projects todevelop different approaches both interms of the scale of the projects andof the type of activities undertaken.Several have, for instance, adopteda strategic approach by working ona whole suite of sites (sometimesacross an entire country).

The scale of these projects providesa number of advantages. They tendto receive a high media profile, which

makes it easier to mobilise interestand cooperation with other interestgroups. They also often involvemany partners, which is useful insharing experiences and developingmanagement models and bestpractice techniques that can beapplied on a large scale.

The majority of LIFE-Nature projects,however, still operate on one or twosites.

They are usually run by regional orlocal conservation authorities whohave the advantage of being alreadyfamiliar with, and involved in, theday-to-day land-use activities of thearea in question. They also know thesocio-economic and cultural contextof the project: who the main interestgroups are and what their attitudestowards nature conservation tendto be.

This bottom up approach is a keyfactor in determining the success ofmany LIFE-Nature projects since it

ensures that sustainable solutions arefound at the level of the individualsites and in close agreement with thelocal actors.

Another major strength of LIFE-Nature is that it provides a structuredframework in which public and privatestakeholder groups can learn to worktogether.

Since the start of LIFE III in the year2000 over two thirds of the 256projects funded so far have been runby partnerships. The average numberof partners is 2 to 3 per projectdepending on the type of manage-ment issues involved and theirlocation (whether in an area ofsignificant human land uses and landowners or with very few socio-economic interests). Some may havemore than 10 partners.

Thus, within these LIFE projects, thedifferent socio-economic partnershave an opportunity to build up asense of trust by sharing theirexperiences and expertise anddevelop a mutual understanding ofeach others interests and concerns.

This not only helps to develop ashared vision for the long-term man-agement of the site but also providesa means of identifying additional op-portunities to put these into practice.

The success of this last aspect is evi-dent from the significant number ofprojects that maintain and expandtheir partnerships long after the LIFEfunding stops and who go on toapply, as a partnership, for othermore long term funding sources suchas the Rural Development Pro-gramme.

When asked, most beneficiariesconsider this partnership approach tobe one of the key strengths of LIFE-Nature funding. Sometimes, merelythe fact of bringing partners togetherto write a LIFE application is in itselfmotivation enough to start aconstructive dialogue over the futureof the Natura 2000 sites.

Pho

to ©

Spa

nish

Cet

acea

n S

ocie

ty,

SE

C

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !�

� ��" # $� ��

�%& ��

��'�

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

(�

)�

��

��&��

�' �'�&�� %

�' �'�&�� %

�' �')&�� %

��*&�� %

Average number of partners according to country

LIFE-Nature project2000–2003:

no. of partners per project


LIFE-Nature helps to de-block the impasse on Natura 2000in France

In the mid 1990s, the French Government froze the implementation of Natura2000 in response to strong opposition from many stakeholder groups. Thelatter felt alienated from the process and resentful of the fact that they hadnot been consulted over the choice of sites, many of which were in privateownership. Initially, there seemed to be no way out of this impasse. But thenthe government decided to carry out a LIFE-Nature project on 36 differentsites across different regions to develop a modus operandi for involving localinterest groups in discussions over the future management of Natura 2000sites in their areas.

The project developed a planning system that uses independent facilitatorsto develop management plans which are then discussed by local steeringgroups. These groups are specifically set up to involve local stakeholders andlandowners in the decision making process. The steering groups have beenvery successful and have since become the focal point for developing legallybinding Natura 2000 contracts with stakeholders which are usually fundedthrough the French Rural Development Programme.

Thanks largely to this project, the debate on Natura 2000 in France was re-launched and dialogue re-established amongst the different interest groups.

Pho

to ©

Flo

rent

Fav

ier

�

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��+��, -�� %

!. � ��

�, -�� %

�,/��0/�1��% ��0��

�, -�� %

�� '%�0 ��2&��3�

Pho

to ©

LIF

E-N

atur

e pr

ojec

t on

sea

tut

les

in t

he P

elag

ian

isla

nds

LIFE-Nature project on sea tutles in thePelagian islands.

LIFE-Nature projects (%):type of

beneficiery


Most LIFE-Nature projects undertakea whole suite of different activitiesin order to achieve their goal. Almostall of these have some some com-munication function.

Preparatory actions, for instance, caninvolve initial contacts and dialoguewith stakeholder groups or studies oftheir socio-economic activities andattitudes towards Natura 2000. Thisin turn helps to determine the mostappropriate management actions totake.

They also involve the development ofmanagement plans in close consult-ation with different interest groups.Experience has shown that manage-ment plans are an invaluable tool forsecuring the long-term conservationof Natura 2000 sites, be they large or

Communication activities funded under LIFE-Nature

LIFE-Nature projects:average budget allocation

��&�� "'�0 ��%4)56

��1'&,�0-�%�4��56

��2��0,��+'�0 ��%4��56

��0,��+�0 ��%4��56

�,/��0��%%

4�56

��7�0 '8��+�8�� 4��56

small. This is because they provide aframework in which to engage allinterest groups in discussions overthe practicalities of Natura 2000 andso help to develop a consensus onthe long-term management optionsfor the sites.

The on site conservation actions alsousually involve establishing agree-ments and contracts with farmers,foresters, hunters etc…. to helpmanage the Natura 2000 sites and toset up high profile demonstrationplots to illustrate how this can bedone.

The fact that each project has adedicated management team alsoprovides them with a human face anda visible focal point. Local projectmanagers, in particular, find that

they spend a considerable amount oftime talking to others and promotingthe project’s goals and aspirations, beit through formal steering committeesor just by chatting to people theyhappen to meet.

Management plans – an important communication tool

Gaining trust and confidence is fundamental to the success of any initiative involvingdecisions over people’s private lands and livelihoods. In the case of Natura 2000, winningpeople’s trust is only possible if a genuine interest is shown in their views and if theseviews are also taken into account in decisions over the future conservation of the site.People must feel that they are making a real contribution and not just being ‘heard out’.

One of the most effective ways of achieving this is through the preparation of Natura2000 management plans. This has proven to be very popular in LIFE-Nature projects.Over 60% have produced such plans and begun to implement them before the end of theproject, usually with the help of the different stakeholder groups. This has led to someuseful good practices on how to organise public participation and initiate stakeholderdialogue (e.g. the Marine SACs project in UK: http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk)

The key advantages of these plans are that they:> gather all the necessary conservation information on the site in one place for all to see;> clarify the existing land uses and their interrelation with nature conservation;> provide an open forum for debate;> lead to a consensus view on how the long term management should be done;> create a sense of shared ownership for the final product amongst all participating groups.

In many respects the management planning process is as important as the final end product. Issues can be discussedin greater detail than would be possible through more classic public consultation processes. In addition they provide ameans for different participants to learn from each other and appreciate the other person’s views.

However it is important to remember that once the momentum is underway, it must be maintained. There is nothingmore counter productive than stimulating a lot of support and interest in developing a management plan and a sharedvision of how the site should be managed, only to find that there are no resources to implement it afterwards.

By the same token, it may sometimes be hard to keep stakeholders interested in the management planning processafter the first flurry of meetings. Particular efforts will be needed to keep the process going and to stimulate interest andactive collaboration on the part of the stakeholders.


Awareness raising activities

High media coverage for LIFE-Nature projects

LIFE Nature projects in general have been particularly effective at gainingmedia interest for their activities. It is estimated that on average everyproject generates between 20 and 50 press articles during its lifetime. Quitea number though manage to generate hundreds of articles, particularlyamongst the more complex and large scale projects.

Most of this press is local as Natura 2000 stories are rarely picked up inthe national newspapers (unless they concern high profile conflicts) butthe local press is probably a more effective way of getting the messagesacross since it is adapted to the local circumstances surrounding theindividual sites. This is not to say that all articles are favourable, but atleast they raise the profile of the issues and encourage further debate andinvolvement.

It is estimated that 12,000–15,000 newspaper articles, radio and TVinterviews have been produced so far as a direct result of LIFE-Nature*.This is far more than could ever have been generated by a coordinatedpublicity campaign at EU.

There is also a specific category ofactions (E) in LIFE-Nature projectsdedicated to awareness raising anddialogue. This is used by every projectand accounts for approximately 7%of the overall budget.

The type of activities carried out underthis category is very broad indeed andranges from the conventional (pro-duction of leaflets) to the moreexperimental (theatre productions,innovative partnerships…).

Essentially, they have four main goals:> To raise awareness of the natural

values of the area and the con-servation issues at stake;

> To mobilise interest amongstdifferent sectors of society andengage them in the project’sactivities so as to encourage theirlong term involvement in manag-ing Natura 2000 sites;

> To provide greater access to, andpossibilities for enjoyment ofnatural areas whilst protectingfragile habitats and species;

> To disseminate and exchangeexperiences on best practicemanagement techniques withother projects and conservationbodies.

Certain communication activitieshave become compulsory under LIFEIII (2000–2004). This is to ensure thattheir experiences and achievementsare widely disseminated. All projectsare thus required to produce adedicated website and, at the end ofthe project, a layman’s reportsummarising their achievements.They must also acknowledge LIFEsupport on all material produced andhelp promote greater awareness ofthe Natura 2000 network (seefollowing chapter).

The second part of this report givessome examples of how thesedifferent actions have been usedsuccessfully in raising awareness andengaging different interest groups inmanaging Natura 2000 sites.


Good practice recommendations incommunicating on Natura 2000

Communication covers everythingfrom running high profile advertisingcampaigns and producing inform-ation material to hosting round tablediscussions and building partner-ships, or simply talking to differentinterest groups.

It requires a certain amount ofimagination, enthusiasm and creativethinking, as well as an organised andopen approach towards others.However, this does not make it thesole preserve of communicationspecialists. Anyone involved in Natura2000 can and, should, be involved incommunication work.

Communication can in fact berelatively straightforward and verysatisfying, providing certain basicprinciples are followed.

In this concluding chapter of part oneof the report, we consider brieflysome of these principles and offersome practical tips on how to putthem into practice:> Why do we want to communicate> who do we want to communicate

with> what messages do we want to

pass on> how do we want to achieve this> what pitfalls should we watch

out for

> how do we know if we havesucceeded.

These good practices are largelyderived from the different experiencesof LIFE-Nature projects which arepresented in part two.

The aim is to illustrate the range oftechniques that have been usedsuccessfully by LIFE in winningsupport for Natura 2000 locally andso inspire others involved in Natura2000 to communicate more frequentlyand effectively on this importantEuropean initiative.

Pho

to ©

Ben

ning

er R

eid

LIFE

pro

ject

This chapter looks at why it is important to communicate on Natura 2000 and offers some practical

tips on how to do this effectively with different interest groups – be they stakeholders, public

authorities or the general public.

Good practice recommendations in communicating on Natura 2000 p. 13

Why is it important to communicate on Natura 2000?

There are many good reasons forcommunicating on Natura 2000:

> Natura 2000 is a directresponse to public concernsover the rapid loss of nature inEurope and people should beinformed of what is being doneto meet their concerns. Accordingto a recent Eurobarometer survey,over a third of Europeans areworried about species extinctionand loss of natural areas. Oftenthough they will know more aboutwildlife in Africa than the naturethat exists on their own doorstep.Thus, Natura 2000 also opens upopportunities for the public todiscover and enjoy Europe’s ownwealth of natural heritage.

> Yet, Natura 2000 remainslargely unknown to the vastmajority of Europeans: Thosewho have heard of it tend to thinkit is simply another layer ofprotection or ‘red tape’ on top ofexisting national and internationalinitiatives (nature reserves,Ramsar sites, National Parks…).They are not aware of the issues

that make Natura 2000 differentfrom previous conservationinitiatives in Europe and that it isabout ‘people and nature’ and not‘nature without people’.

> Natura 2000 is a Europeaninitiative – for the first time all 25countries are working together toconserve nature using the samestrong legislative framework.There is an important learningprocess in cooperating at a Euro-pean level and many advantages

in administrations, NGOs, stake-holders and site managers shar-ing their experiences and know-how.

Not only does it avoid ‘reinventingthe wheel’ but it also creates amore coherent and effectiveapproach towards the manage-ment of this Network. LIFE-Nature projects, in particular, areideally placed to help achieve thisexchange of experience.

> Much of Natura 2000 will be onprivate land and will be used foreconomic purposes. It is clear,therefore, that the owners andusers must be informed andinvolved in discussions over thefuture management of their land(they are also often best placedto do this work ). That way thedifferent land-uses can be madecompatible with each other andsustainable development can beallowed to continue whilstrespecting the areas’ naturalvalues.

By the same token there alsoneeds to be some recognitionthat public influence over privateland for nature conservationpurposes is as legitimate anundertaking as other over-ridingpublic interests (e.g. landscapeand visual impacts, infrastructuredevelopment, cultural heritage,health and safety …).

Ten good reasons to communicate on Natura 2000

1. The vast majority of Europeans have still not heard of Natura 20002. It is a European initiative requiring exchange of experiences and networking3. It involves mainly private land4. It is currently shrouded in misconceptions5. It can help create new opportunities and partnerships for rural areas6. It leads to joined-up thinking at policy level7. It informs the public of the governments’ response to their concerns8. It Increases people’s possibilities to enjoy their natural heritage9. It brings the discussion on Natura 2000 into the realm of an informed

debate10. It encourages everyone to feel a sense of ownership and responsibility for

Natura 2000

Pho

to ©

Cat

herin

e K

eena


Pho

to ©

Arc

hiv

der

Abt

eilu

ng U

mw

elts

chut

z,A

mt

der

Tiro

ler

Land

esre

gier

ung

Pho

to ©

LIF

E p

roje

ct L

IFE

9960

94

> Many myths and misconcept-ions have built up aroundNatura 2000 which need to becorrected. For instance, thereseems to be a general view thateconomic land-use practiceshave, in principle, a negativeimpact on nature. Often it is justthe contrary, conservation ishighly dependent on the con-tinued active management ofsites and much can be learnedfrom the stakeholders’ own pract-ical experiences in this respect.

People should also be aware thatNatura 2000 does not system-atically imply restrictions. Wherechange is required, the aim is towork with the stakeholdersconcerned so that the areas aremanaged sensitively, while at thesame time introducing a degreeof protection that recognises thesocial and economic uses of thesite;

> Greater communication andcooperation can lead to newopportunities for rural areas.The rural economy in Europe hasseen many changes over the last50 years. An increasing numberof rural areas are showing signsof economic struggle, especiallythose that practice extensive landuses in so-called marginal areas.This in turn has had serious socialconsequences, such as ruraldepopulation, which risksspreading to the new MemberStates.

Recent reforms of the CAP andRural Development Programme(RDP) aim to address thisproblem by de-coupling farmpayments from production andby introducing additional measur-es to diversify the economy andencourage greater inwardinvestment. Natura 2000 is ideallyplaced in this respect. It is aEuropean policy in its own rightcovering an extensive part theterritory, often in exactly thosemarginal rural areas.

As such, Natura 2000 can becomea powerful ally in attracting inwardinvestments to help maintainexisting land use practices orencourage new ones (e.g.tourism). Indeed several RDPmeasures are now specificallygeared to Natura 2000 inrecognition of its important role inmaintaining rural diversity.

> Communication leads to joined-up thinking at policy level. Inmost Natura 2000 areas, variouspublic bodies and governmentaldepartments have an influence onthe way the different land-useswithin that area are practiced.Consequently, their actions candirectly impact on Natura 2000and influence the way a site ismanaged. It is vital therefore thatthese different public authoritiesare made fully aware of Natura2000 so that it can be taken intoaccount in their daily work.

> And finally, communication is theonly way to bring the discuss-ions over Natura 2000 into therealm of an informed debateand away from some of the moreinstinctively negative reactionsthat are often seen today whichare caused by misunderstandingand lack of information. Estab-lishing a dialogue betweendifferent interest groups andconservationists can help root outunfounded fears about the impactof Natura 2000.

This will not only pave the wayfor a more constructive discus-sion on the future managementof these sites but also helpidentify those areas where Natura2000 really does present aproblem for those involved.Efforts can then be focusedspecifically on these difficult areasin order to find a way forwardwithout bringing the wholeNetwork into question again.

So the conclusion is clear:communication is essential if theNatura 2000 network is tosucceed and everyone needs tofeel a sense of ownership andresponsibility for conserving ourrich natural heritage. Ultimately,we are all its stakeholders inthis important task – whetherconservationists, governmentofficials, land owners and usersor individual members of thepublic.

Volunteers, lowland LimestonePavements, UK.

Who should we be communicating with?

Pho

to ©

Arc

hiv

der

Abt

eilu

ng U

mw

elts

chut

z, A

mt

der

Tiro

ler

Land

esre

gier

ung

Having identified that it is not onlynecessary but also beneficial tocommunicate on Natura 2000, the nextquestion is who should we becommunicating with? Experience hasshown that there are essentially fourdistinct target groups for communi-cating on Natura 2000. The approachtaken will be different for each (assection 2 of the report illustratesfurther):

> StakeholdersStakeholders incorporate a rangeof different sectors of society, fromthose directly affected by Natura2000, such as private landownersand land users to those that maybe indirectly affected or implicatedsuch as tourism providers,recreational groups or otherprivate businesses. They alsoinclude people who could have aninfluence on the process, forinstance key opinion leaders orlocal politicians.

> Public authoritiesPublic authorities include alladministrations whose policiesand activities could have animpact on Natura 2000, whetherpositive or negative. This can beat local or regional level or atnational level. The list is surpris-ingly long and includes, amongst

others, authorities responsible forplanning, water management,farming, forestry, tourism andfisheries, as well as other environ-mental departments dealing withEIAs or pollution and even, onoccasion, administrations res-ponsible for employment, justiceand enterprise.

> The general publicThe general public is an equallydiverse group. It can mean localcommunities living in and aroundNatura 2000 sites or those fromfurther afield who come to enjoy‘nature’ (through recreational pur-suits, relaxation, tourism etc…). Italso includes individuals who careabout their natural environmentand the loss of biodiversity andwho want to make an active con-tribution through volunteer work.

> Conservation NGOs and otherCivil Society groupsNGOs have a wealth of scientificexpertise and practical know-howas regards species and habitatmanagement. They are particularlygood at raising awareness andinterest on conservation issues.Their large membership alsomakes them a powerful lobbyingforce and generates an importantbody of volunteers who want to

help out and be the ‘eyes andears’ of society, reporting prob-lems where they see them.

Other civil society groups can alsofind useful areas of mutual ben-efit with nature conservation –schools, local youth clubs, herit-age groups etc….

It may not be necessary to communi-cate with all of these different interestgroups with the same level of effort. Alot will depend on the circumstancessurrounding each individual site. It isuseful therefore to determine whoshould be the primary target for com-munication and who should be a sec-ondary target in order that limitedresources are used where they aremost required

A word should also be said about themedia as they have a significant im-pact on people’s attitudes and per-ceptions. Communicating with themedia is an indirect way of reachingthe different target audiences but isessential for winning (or losing!) sup-port for Natura 2000 issues andshould always be borne in mind whenplanning communication activities.



Benefits of communicating with different target groups

Stakeholders > Develops an understanding of each others’ interests> Encourages the sharing of experiences in managing

the natural values under threat> Builds trust and confidence> Encourages a consensus approach to management> Creates a sense of pride and ‘ownership’ for the site> Creates new socio-economic opportunities and

partnerships> Ensures continuity

Policy developers > Leads to better integration of N2000 into otherand government policiesbodies > Encourages a more coordinated approach to land-

use policies within the region> Highlights areas of mutual interest and helps to plan

strategically

General public > Addresses concerns over the loss of wildlife andnature

> Raises the level of awareness of Europe’s diversenatural heritage and the need to conserve it

> Provides additional opportunities for learning,discovery, relaxation, recreation, health ….

> Encourages responsible behaviour> Gives individuals a chance to get involved and

make a contribution

NGOs and other > Hold much of the scientific and managementcivil society groups expertise on nature

> Campaign for and help raise the profile of Natura 2000> Raise funds for nature conservation> Implement conservation actions on the ground> Act as the ‘eyes and ears’ of society> Mobilises people through their membership

Pho

to ©

Räd

le

Pho

to ©

Lee

Val

ley

Reg

iona

l Par

k A

utho

rity

Developing strong messages is afundamental part of any communi-cation process and it is therefore worthspending some time in devising these,especially when dealing with some-thing as complex as Natura 2000.

The importance of this cannot beover-emphasised, the best communi-cation strategy in the world will beineffective if it doesn’t have a clearmessage or if the message is tooconfused or complicated.

Much can be learnt from commercialbranding operations for popularconsumer products (without ofcourse having to adopt the samehighly sophisticated techniques theyuse!). Their approach is to devisesimple, easily understandablemessages or slogans that people canrelate to in their everyday lives.

Once these have been developedthey are repeated over and over againuntil the ‘brand’ becomes a house-hold name.

Natura 2000 is a classic example ofa policy requiring simple but strongmessages. The procedures andconditions for designation andmanagement are so complex that onecan quickly get lost in details. This,of course, also makes it much harderto explain to others.

Recognising this, the Commissionand Member States are currentlyworking on developing a set of keymessages for Natura 2000, with thehelp of a Communication workinggroup made up of Member States’public relations officers, commun-ication specialists and NGOs. Theirobjective is to find a series of unifyingthemes that can be used in allcountries to promote a commonunderstanding and ‘branding’ ofNatura 2000 across Europe.

To contribute to the debate themost popular themes used by LIFE-Nature projects have been examinedto see which messages are mostoften used and appear to beparticularly successful.

This revealed three main axes (seetable):> The Nature angle: Natura 2000

safeguards the most importantrare habitats and species inEurope

> The people angle: Natura 2000is ‘your’ nature. It allows sustain-able development to proceedwhilst protecting biodiversity

> The European angle: Natura2000 sites exist in 25 countries,together they form part of acoordinated European Network ofsensitively managed areas toprotect species and habitats

Key messages on Natura 2000

across their natural range andirrespective of political or nationalboundaries.

How these messages are then usedand put across is, of course, up tothe regional or local authorities,NGOs, projects and interest groupsto decide. They are afterall the onewho can ensure the messages arepersonalised, adapted and placed inthe right local context, instead ofbeing seen as coming from ‘Brussels’(the sites are important in Europeancontext but it is still ‘their localnature’).

Further details of this and othercommunication initiatives, includingthe Commission’s own communi-cation strategy for Natura 2000 canbe found in annex I and on theCommission’s nature website http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/home.htm.

Limestone pavement, the Burren, Ireland

Pho

to ©

Pla

ntlif

e

Key messages should be:> Positive> Simple to understand for all> Memorable> Accurate> Realistic



What is so special about Natura 2000?

The people angle –NATURA 2000 IS YOUR NATURE> Natura 2000 is a response to people’s increasing concerns over the loss of

biodiversity> Natura 2000 helps to improve the quality of life for all and provides greater

opportunities for recreation, relaxation, enjoyment and discovery in nature> Many sites are valuable for nature because they have been managed extensively

by people for centuries and are part of their culture> People will continue to live and work in Natura 2000 sites: people need nature, nature needs people> Natura 2000 is about working in partnership with local stakeholders to conserve nature in a living landscape> Natura 2000 promotes sustainable development whilst protecting biodiversity> Natura 2000 can provide new opportunities for rural areas in Europe

The European angle – A 25 COUNTRY EUROPEAN NETWORK> 25 countries are working together to form a European Network of sites to save Europe’s rich and diverse natural

heritage> Natura 2000 sites exist in every country of the EU> Every site is an important part of the European network> The Natura 2000 Network covers almost a fifth of Europe’s territory> Thanks to a European Network species and habitats can be conserved across their natural range, irrespective of

national boundaries

The nature angle – SAVING NATURE> Natura 2000 conserves Europe’s rich and diverse natural heritage, much of which has been formed by centuries of

human activities> Natura 2000 safeguards the most important and rare habitats and species in Europe, whilst promoting wider

biodiversity> Natura 2000 aims to bring endangered species back from the brink of extinction> Natura 2000 provides areas for wildlife and man to cohabit in harmony> Natura 2000 is part of Europe’s response to saving global biodiversity

Pho

to ©

Vei

kko

Vas

ama

Pho

to ©

LIF

E p

roje

ct L

IFE

9960

94

Pho

to ©

Iñig

o Fa

jard

oP

hoto

© N

ew F

ores

t LI

FE P

artn

ersh

ip

Pho

to ©

Dav

id K

jaer

Having identified why, with whom andwhat one wants to communicate, thenext stage is to start planning how toput this into practice. As part two ofthis report illustrates there are a widerange of techniques that can be usedbut, in order to ensure they areeffective and make the best use oflimited resources, it is necessary toorganise and plan the work carefully.

This is best done by developing acommunication strategy. One shouldnot be put off by the word ‘strategy’.It does not automatically mean hiringcommunication experts or developinghighly sophisticated marketing tools.Anyone can draw up and implementa strategy, even if they have neverbeen involved in communicationactivities beforehand.

A strategy is simply a means ofplanning and organising one’sactivities to get the maximum bene-fit out of limited resources. It isessentially based on common senseand helps avoid dissipating one’sefforts.

A strategy also provides an importantreference point for determiningwhether the communication activitiesare having the desired effects. Is thestrategy achieving its objectives ordoes it need to be fine tuned.

There are essentially five basic partsof any communication strategy (seebox):

1. Carry out a detailed analysis ofthe Natura 2000 site to know whoyour primary stakeholders are,what their concerns/activities areand their general knowledge/interest in nature

2. Set clear objectives of what youwant to achieve and identify yourkey messages and targets

3. Devise an action plan – howwill you communicate, withwhom, when, where, using whichmethods

Basic ingredients of a communication strategy

Analysis> What are the main issues for nature conservation> What land use activities are practised in and around the Natura 2000

sites> How are they likely to be affected by Natura 2000 designation> What other socio-economic issues need to be taken into account> What other activities or land-use policies, laws, should be considered> Who are the primary stakeholders, who else should be targeted> What is their level of knowledge about nature and Natura 2000> What are their attitudes to nature conservation and Natura 2000> What actions have already been taken, were they successful, If not why

not?

Objectives> Make Natura 2000 known to all interest groups and the general public> Explain what Natura 2000 means in practice> Reassure the different audiences> Encourage participation

Action plan> What techniques are considered best for each of the target audiences> How should they be done, when and where> Who will do them,> what resources are required> Who will coordinate the work> How will the momentum be maintained

Funding> What are the estimated costs of implementing the action plan> Has enough money and resources been earmarked in the annual budget

Review> what are the success indicators for determining if the strategy has

worked> how will these be assessed, by whom and when: opinion polls,

interviews, surveys, observations.> how will the information be used to refine and adjust the strategy.

Developing a communication strategy

4. Allocate sufficient resources –calculate what resources areneeded when and ensure thatthese are made available

5. Identify indicators of successto enable you to review theachievements of the strategy atregular intervals and fine tune asnecessary.


Local TV interview during Münster SPALIFE project. P

hoto

© C

hris

toph

Rüc

krie

m


The range of techniques that can beused for communicating on natureconservation is immense butessentially they fall into two maincategories:> one-way flow of information from

you to your audience> two-way flow of information

between you and your audience.

These can in turn be delivereddirectly (e.g. through brochures,bilateral meetings etc) or indirectly(via the media, a third party or anintermediary such as a school orassociation)

Every method has advantages anddisadvantages. These need to betaken into account when choosingwhich communication technique touse (see table opposite).

The one-way flow of communi-cation is the most common form –e.g. leaflets, brochures, websites,information panels, videos, posters….Its main advantage is that it isrelatively cheap and easy to do andcan theoretically reach a lot of peoplein one go.

It does however have considerabledisadvantages too. The most obviousis that the information goes only oneway. There is no assurance thatpeople will actually read the materialthey are given and if they do, whetherthis will motivate them to show aninterest.

This is all the more relevant in today’ssociety where people are generallyoverloaded with information. If thesemethods are used they should becarefully planned and specificallyadapted to respond to people’sinterests. Otherwise the materialmight simply be discarded unread.

The other option is to consider usinga two-way flow of communicationsuch as public information meetings,working groups, one-to-one discuss-ions with individuals or organisingfield visits.

What techniques to use?

People remember:> 10% of what they hear> 30% of what they read> 50% of what they see> 90% of what they do

Source: Provoke, Relate, Reveal, ScottishNatural Heritage

The main advantage is that it createsa personal contact between twoparties and so helps build up mutualtrust and understanding. For Natura2000, this type of dialogue is essentialfor developing a consensus view onhow the areas should be protectedand managed.

The main disadvantage is that it takesa good deal of time, energy andresources as well as a certain amountof diplomacy and skill in commun-icating with others. If done properlyhowever in the spirit of open dialogue,the success rate is often very highand well worth the effort.

Pho

to ©

UK

LIF

E p

roje

ct o

n lim

esto

ne p

avem

ents

Table: examples of different communication tools used in LIFE-Nature projectsMethod Advantage Disadvantage

One way communication

Printed– Letters – Uses familiar techniques that – Needs to be effectively distributed– Brochures, leaflets are simple to manage – Is often not read– Reports, books – Requires less time and money – Can send confused messages– Magazines, newsletters – Reaches a wide audience both that are not understood in the– cartoons locally and further afield way they are intended– postcards/calendars – Draws attention to a problem – Is often not enough to– t shirts people may not know exists motivate people to take action– educational material – Keeps people informed – Effects are short lived

Information technology– Website – Avoids printing costs – Not everyone is ‘wired up’ or– CD Roms, DVD – Responds to an increasing IT- computer literate yet, especially

orientated society, especially amongst the older generationamongst the young

Visual– Information panels – Provides a permanent form of – Becoming ubiquitous, people– Displays and exhibitions communication are starting to ignore them– Multimedia programs – If made entertaining and – Can contain too much– Plays, theatre enjoyable can be memorable information which is off–putting– Films – Stimulates all the senses – More expensive to produce and– Videos (sight, hearing, smell, feel) requires specialised skills– Photos – Makes it easier to explain a – Information or technology can

complex story become outdated

Two way communication

Stakeholder orientated – Establishes a personal rapport – Is more time consuming– One to one discussions, – Encourages mutual and costly, no guarantee

phone calls understanding of success– Meetings, round tables, – Develops a knowledge base – Needs to be sustained to

public hearings, workshops, – Ensures the messages are maintain the momentum– Management forum understood in the way they – Can lead to a negative backlash– Steering committee are intended if not handled properly– Field visits – Builds up trust and confidence – Reaches only a small audienceGeneral public orientated – Leads to longer lasting solutions at a time– guided tours – Motivates people better to get – Needs a lot of organisation– Work camps actively involved and planning– Open days, festivals, events – provides opportunities for – Requires inter-personal skillsLonger term socialising – Does not reach an audience– Education for school children further afield– Training programmes

Indirect communication

Media oriented– newspaper articles – Reaches a large audience – Issues have to remain simple,– radio/TV interviews instantly both locally and not possible to go into details– press releases further afield – No control over contents of– advertising – Stimulates curiosity amongst articles or TV spots – can also

groups not normally interested be very negativein nature – Could generate polarised views

– uses the most popular – Not targeted at specific groupscommunication medium

– builds a rapport with the pressincreasing further media interest

Other– launch events – Attracts high profile and – Costly and time-consuming– involvement of third parties influential people – Usually only possible where

(e.g. a representative of hunting – Can have a significant multiplier there are benefits for bothor agricultural associations) effect parties

– intermediaries or mediators – Wins trust more rapidly – people – Mediation requires specialisedtalking the same language skills

– Offers a neutral party for conflictresolution



Difficulties in communicating about nature

Pho

to ©

Jim

Ash

er

When developing a communicationstrastegy it is also worth consideringsome of the common problems andmistakes you may come across whencommunicating about nature in orderthat you can avoid these:

> A language full of technicalterms and jargonNature conservation is not aneasy subject to communicate on.Part of the problem undoubtedlylies in the kind of language weuse: biodiversity conservation,endemic species, threatenedhabitat types, favourable conser-vation status, Natura 2000, SACs,SCIs, SPAs etc …. These are allterms that people have difficultyrelating to in their everyday livesand that will immediately putmany off. The only message thiskind of scientific jargon transmitsis that nature conservation is anelitist subject only accessible tospecialists. It also promotes an‘us and them’ culture. The factthat Natura 2000 concerns ourcollective natural heritage istherefore completely lost.

> Describing nature in a way thatpeople cannot relate toThe way in which conservationissues are described is often verydry, impersonal and conse-

quently uninteresting to theaverage person. In a bid to bescientifically accurate, manyforget to focus on the emotionaland enjoyable aspects of nature:a sense of wonder, curiosity,relaxation, pleasure, tranquillity.Yet, it is these aspects thatpeople remember most. The keyis to keep the messages simpleand interesting and to relate themto things that people can identifywith in their daily lives (as largeas 10 football pitches, as smallas a €1 cent, these birds behavejust like people at a ball…).

> A focus on rare and endanger-ed speciesThere is usual ly a strongemphasis on protecting rareand endangered species. Theadvantage is that certain charis-matic species like the brown bearor sea turtle have immediateappeal and can act as flagshipsfor nature conservation generally.The disadvantage is that anemphasis on rare species, bethey high profile species likebears or, more often, obscurespecies that nobody has heardof, tends to de-personalisesnature, especially at the locallevel. Many people will simplynever see such animals or plants.

A way needs to be found to getthe dual message across thatNatura 2000 is about ‘your nature’which is special in a Europeancontext. The network does afterall cover almost a fifth of the EUand most people can find aNatura 2000 site close to them. Itis also about conserving rarehabitats and species in coreareas. The large number of sitesinvolved testifies to the factthat Europe has a particularlyrich and diverse natural heritage,unfortunately under increasingthreat.

> All doom and gloomAnother problem with communi-cating on nature conservation isthat it is often full of ‘doom andgloom’ and alarmist messages. Ingeneral, people are likely to findthese concerns more palatableif they are accompanied bypotential solutions. Also, thereare still significant gaps in ourscientific knowledge of speciesand habitats. Therefore the infor-mation needs to be presentedcarefully as the best available andnot as unquestionable scientificfacts. It is a very long struggleback to credibility if the concernsare overstated, or if the solutionsadvocated don’t succeed.

Pho

to ©

LIF

E-N

atur

e pr

ojec

t on

sea

tur

tles,

Ital

y

Common communication problems and how to solve them

Problem Solution

> too much jargon Use language that everyone can understand and keep the information simple.Don’t try to explain everything.

> describing nature in a way that Make the information interesting and try to associate it with things thatpeople cannot relate to people identify with in their daily lives by using analogies and comparisons.

Bring out the sense of wonder of nature. Use a bit of humour.

> Strong focus on rare and Protecting rare species and plants may be the focus but it is in a widerobscure species biodiversity context. Link the fact that habitats harbouring rare species also

harbour many other natural features that are more familiar to people. Theirnature is also an important part of Europe’s diverse and rich natural heritage.

> Too much doom and gloom Don’t overdo it and be sure to present also the potential solutions to theseproblems. Try to bring out the positive elements.

> Not seeing the other person’s Put yourself in the other person’s shoes and find out beforehand what theirperspective main concerns are as well as their level of interest and knowledge in

conservation issues.

> Wrong choice of communication Plan your communication work carefully bearing in mind whom you want totool communicate with and what you want them to understand or do. Keep

repeating the messages using a variety of communication methods until youhave succeeded.

> Fear of compromise Ignore this fear! – you will have much greater chances of reaching a mutuallyagreeable solution through communicating than by not communicating.

Tips for communicating onnature

> Identify your audience> Target your message> Keep it simple and relate it to

issues people can identify with> Use different techniques> Drive home the message

> Not seeing the other person’sperspectiveConservationists will also oftentalk about their own needs andconcerns when communicatingwithout much apparent thought orconsideration for others whomight be implicated. Sometimes,the audience will simply ignorethe information produced, butmore often than not it will causeirritation and alienate them evenfurther. It helps therefore to putoneself in the shoes of the otherperson and to try and see the is-sues from their perspective first.

Another option is to find an ap-propriate intermediary or thirdparty. Many farmers for instanceare more open to the views oftheir farmer’s representative orunion. It may therefore be moreeffective to dialogue with that rep-resentative and reach a commonunderstanding with them. Theycan then be encouraged to com-municate about Natura 2000 withtheir membership – not only is thedebate likely to be more effectivesince the partners are talking the

same language but it also has asignificant multiplier effect.

> Fear of compromiseConservationists often fear that ifthey enter into dialogue with oth-ers, they will be forced to makecompromises. Sometimes thismay well be the case but not en-tering into a discussion with oth-ers could have far worseconsequences – like no solutionsat all. It has been demonstratedtime and again, that acceptanceand support for conservation in-creases significantly the morepeople know about the issuesand concerns.

This is not to say that people willalways cooperate, there will inevi-tably be cases where viewsremain polarised and entrenched.However, at least those consultedwill no longer be able to hidebehind the contention that theconservationists have not‘explained things’. This helpsseparate out the real concernsfrom the more emotive ones inwhich people simply don’t care

or don’t want to change theirhabits. Once such views are ex-posed for what they are, they willbe much harder to defend in theface of public opinion.

> Wrong choice of communica-tion tool: finally, people oftenthink communication is just aboutproducing a nice brochure or acouple of leaflets and posters. Orworse they organise meetingsand then only put their own viewsacross without providing anopportunity for dialogue with itsaudience. This on its ownachieves nothing, just a deludedsense of having made an effortto communicate!



The previous guidance on com-munication has been largely derivedfrom practical experiences throughLIFE–Nature projects. The variety ofcommunication techniques used bythese projects to generate interest intheir activities is truly vast and rangesfrom the most classic to the moreinnovative and experimental. Some ofthese are highlighted in part two ofthis report and will hopefully providevaluable food for thought for others.

Whilst the communication successesof the LIFE-Nature projects are clear,it has to be said that they have not,on the whole, been so successful oractive in promoting Natura 2000 assuch. Yet, this is why the projectsreceived LIFE money in the first place.

Practical tips for LIFE-Nature projects on promoting Natura 2000

Moreover, with 10% of the sites in theNatura 2000 Network targeted byLIFE, the collective potential for theseprojects to raise the profile andpresent a positive image of Natura2000 is very significant indeed.

In effect, LIFE projects shouldconsider themselves as Natura 2000‘ambassadors’. The more they areable increase the visibil ity andacceptance of Natura 2000 locally,the greater the chances are of thisbeing taken up and adoptedelsewhere.

That is why it has now becomeobligatory for all LIFE III projects tomake reference to Natura 2000, aswell as LIFE, in their publicity and

awareness raising material. In fact allon-going LIFE-Nature projects arestrongly encouraged to do so now.

The question then arises: how bestto do this? There is no ‘standard’ ormodel to use and much will dependon the kind of communication toolsbeing applied. Nevertheless, there arecertain basic factors that should beused by all projects in order to createa common understanding and‘branding’ of Natura 2000. These canthen be developed further or adaptedas appropriate.

Pho

to ©

Em

ilio L

agun

a

The following lists some of theessential elements to be included inany awareness raising materialprepared under LIFE projects.

The first is the systematic use of theNatura 2000 logo: the more this logois used the more familiar it willbecome to people. It is in fact a formof branding which helps create anidentity for Natura 2000. It shouldtherefore be included, together withthe LIFE logo, in all awareness raisingmaterial produced under the projectand on any other public documents,such as survey reports, managementplans, posters, even the project’sletter headed paper if possible etc….

The second is a short descriptionof what the logo stands for .Although the Natura 2000 logo is agood visual tool, on its own it willinitially mean nothing to people unlessthere is also an explanation of what itrepresents.

This explanation can be expanded orrestricted depending on the type ofcommunication medium used. Forinstance, if it is to be placed on aninformation panel or back of adocument, space will be limited andthe text will need to be as succinctas possible. Here the purpose ismerely to explain what the logostands for and to give the briefest ofexplanations of what Natura 2000 is(see box).

Suggested text to accompany theNatura 2000 logo:

‘Natura 2000 – Europe’s nature foryou. This site is part of the Euro-pean Natura 2000 Network. It hasbeen designated because it hostssome of Europe’s most threat-ened species and habitats. All 25countries of the EU are workingtogether through the Natura 2000network to safeguard Europe’s richand diverse natural heritage for thebenefit of all’.


Even with information panels though,it is possible to elaborate further onNatura 2000. Several projects havecreated panels, or sections withinpanels, specifically for this purpose.Their experience has been that peopleare indeed interested in finding outmore about what is happening aroundEurope on nature and how ‘their’ sitefits in to this wider strategy.

Another useful tool for describing theNatura 2000 Network is a stylized mapof the EU. This helps to visualize theEuropean nature of the Network andtaps into people’s natural curiosity formapped information.

When it comes to the more lengthyprinted material such as brochures,books and leaflets, a more detailedexplanation is needed on Natura 2000.

For those produced under LIFEprojects, the text should explainfurther why the site is protected as aNatura 2000 site, what this means inpractice and how people areimplicated in this designation (e.g. interms of integrating conservationconcerns in other land-uses, ensuringdevelopment initiatives safeguardendangered species and habitats,providing recreational opportunitiesthat are sensitive to the natural valueof the area). The link with LIFE fundingshould also be clearly made: i.e. thatNatura 2000 designation is the reasonwhy the project receives EU funding.


For project websites (which are nowobligatory under LIFE III) thesedescriptions can be taken one stepfurther. Space is theoretically unlimitedon a www but if it is badly presentedit will not be used. Thus, it is oftenuseful to start with a short descriptionand then add further layers ofinformation to allow people to explorein greater detail if they wish. Links canalso be established to other www sitessuch as the ones hosted by national

or regional authorities which providefuller details of Natura 2000 and oftenextensive data bases on the individualsites.

These are just some of the basicelements recommended to be used byLIFE projects to increase the profile ofNatura 2000 in their work. The guide-lines in the previous pages of thischapter should provide additionalideas and tips in this respect.

Projects are also advised to look atwhat has been national level topromote Natura 2000. Just like theforthcoming brochures on Natura2000 to be produced by the EuropeanCommission there is a wealth ofmaterial available which can be usedor adapted by the projects for theirown needs (see Annex I).

PART TWOLIFE-NATURE

PROJECT EXAMPLES



Communicating with stakeholdersThis chapter illustrates the range of communication techniques used by LIFE-Nature projects to

raise awareness amongst stakeholder groups and engage them in the management of Natura

2000 sites.

Pho

to ©

Arc

turo

s

Stakeholders include a wide rangeof different sectors of society fromprivate landowners, to farmers, forest-ers, hunters, fishermen and otherswho depend on their land for theirlivelihood. They also include tourismoperators and recreational groups ordevelopment organizations who areimplicated in rural land use activi-ties and policies.

Communication with different landowners and users can be either director indirect, for instance, through theirrepresentatives, elected members or

influential third parties. Whatever themethod used though it is essentialthat they are given an opportunity tohave a say and influence the way theNatura 2000 sites are managed in thelong run.

The key to success when communi-cating with stakeholders is thereforeto ensure that they are correctlyinformed about the purpose of Natura2000 designation and its practicalimplications and, to associate themwith decisions over the subsequentmanagement of these areas.

This can only be achieved if thereis mutual trust and understandingbetween the different parties involved.

The following case studies illustratehow this has been achieved in avariety of circumstances and withdifferent stakeholder groups.

Seminar on bears for local people in Dardha village, Southern Albania.

The contextMany farmers are intolerant of bearson their land, and sometimesshoot them illegally to protect theirterritory. This is in fact the singlelargest threat to this species inGreece. The NGO, Arcturos, decidedto launch a LIFE-Nature project to getto the root of this problem.

The activitiesThe organisation began by conduct-ing a detailed analysis of past inci-dents within 18 Natura 2000 sites inCentral and Northern Greece. This wasfollowed up by one-to-one discus-sions with all farmers, beekeepers,shepherds and hunters living in andaround the Natura 2000 sites. The aimwas to hear their views on the prob-lem of bears and to use this informa-tion to identify possible solutions. Thisresulted in the introduction of preven-tive measures designed to stop bearsdamaging private property (fencing,guard dogs ...).

To ensure the results remained dura-ble, the project went on to hire 68 sea-sonal wardens to maintain closecontact with the different interestgroups and land users over the wholeproject period (several years). Theypaid regular visits to those living in andaround the Natura 2000 sites and

Analysing landowners concerns of bears in Greece

LIFE in action case one

Seasonal wardens meet regularly with localland owners (left).

Pho

to ©

Jur

ma

Luht

a

Pho

to ©

Arc

turo

s

Pho

to ©

Arc

turo

s

soon became familiar faces locally.They carried out regular checks tosee if the owners were satisfied withthe protection measures and tohelp them with any maintenancework. Additionally, volunteer groupsfrom Athens and Thessaloniki wereoccasionally brought in over theweekend to help the farmers withtheir activities.

The resultThe local stakeholders were highlyappreciative of the obvious interestshown by the project in their liveli-hoods and views. By helping them intheir daily activities a feeling of soli-darity emerged, re-enforced by theregular presence of volunteergroups from the large towns. It alsocreated a shared sense of respons-ibility for the bears’ survival. Thebears became the property of allrather than the property of none.

By the end of the project, attitudestowards the bears had begun tochange and the number of shootingshad decreased. Arcturos also lobbiedsuccessfully for a change in the statecompensation system to gain bettersupport for livestock loss and theintroduction of additional incentivesfor preventive measures under theGreek Rural Development Plan.

Keywords: one-to-one dialogue,seasonal wardens, volunteers

Communicating with stakeholders p. 29


The contextRelatively little is known about theecology and management needs ofmany marine species. Yet, it is diffi-cult to convince people to take theconservation concerns seriouslywithout this information.

In 2002, the Spanish Cetacean Soci-ety (SEC) began a LIFE-Nature projectto survey cetaceans and sea turtlesalong the southern coast of Spain, inorder to be able to find a consensusview on their management with thedifferent interest groups concerned.

The activitiesThe project first carried out a surveyto identify all stakeholder groups in theregion whose livelihood depended onthe sea in order to develop a commu-nication strategy specifically targetedat these different groups. The aim wasto raise their awareness of marine con-servation issues and inform them ofthe latest scientific developments.

Three old sailing vessels were kittedout with information material on themarine environment and surveyequipment. The boats travelled thelength of the Andalucian coast, stop-ping at selected ports and bays alongthe way to deliver a well-publicisedprogramme of events, talks, monitor-ing activities and excursions.

This journey is repeated at regularintervals to maintain their interest andupdate them on the latest scientificfindings.

The resultsThis targeted awareness raising workhas been important in creating a con-structive and informed climate for themore formal round-table discussionson the development of conservationorientated management plans in keymarine Natura 2000 areas.

Sharing scientific information on cetaceans in Spanish waters

LIFE in action case two

Thanks to the success of the infor-mation campaign and the popularityof the boats, the discussions areproceeding in a spirit of cooperationin spite of the fact that the conserv-ationists haven’t yet a completepicture of marine ecology and con-servation requirements.

By sharing the results of the scien-tific surveys as soon as they areknown, all interested parties felt asense of ‘finding out’ together. Thus,the stakeholders can see that theNGO hasn’t a hidden agenda and isprepared to do serious scientific workbefore advocating measures that mayaffect their livelihoods. The fact thatthese groups are associated and wellinformed from the outset re-enforcesthe sense of collaboration and sharedownership of the process.

Keywords: identification ofstakeholders, travelling exhibitions,early dialogue

Pho

to ©

Spa

nish

Cet

acea

n S

ocie

ty,

SE

C

Pho

to ©

Spa

nish

Cet

acea

n S

ocie

ty,

SE

C

LIFE project activities aimed at involvinglocal fishermen.

The contextConvincing local people to supportthe conservation of less charismaticspecies such as amphibians is not aneasy task. But sometimes this can beachieved by exploring the associa-tions these species have with theirsurroundings.

This is how a LIFE-Nature project inEstonia managed to convince thelocal inhabitants of a small islandin the Baltic sea to assist in theirefforts to restore the original habitatsof the natterjack toad.

The activitiesThe project manager visited eachhousehold on the island to introducethe project and, during the course ofthe conversation, asked the inhabit-ants to describe what it used to belike on the island before the reed bedstook over the coastline (reeds are alegacy of the intensive cooperativefarms during Russian times). Peopleenthusiastically recounted how beau-tiful the island was back then. Theycould see all the way down to theshoreline and out at sea.

A room with a view: raising the profile of theNatterjack toad in Estonia

LIFE in action case three

At this point the project managerexplained that this could happenagain if they cooperated with theproject. This was because the toadsdepend on the very same low lyingcoastal meadows that open up thelandscape and create the beautifulviews.

The resultFrom then on, restoring the toads’meadows became more meaningfulfor the inlanders as they could asso-ciate this with something tangible andrelevant to them. Soon people beganto cut the tall reeds and mow themeadows outside their windows too!With the view came the long forgot-ten sound of the natterjack toad.

Keywords: finding something peoplecan relate to

Restoring coastal meadows forBufo calamita on Manilaid Island, Estonia.

Pho

to ©

Vol

dem

ar R

anna

p

Pho

to ©

Vol

dem

ar R

anna

p

Pho

to ©

Vol

dem

ar R

anna

p



Identifying people’s attitudes andperceptions towards nature conser-vation will help in determining themost effective means of raising theirinterest and awareness.

The four basic questions to ask are:> do they know anything about

Natura 2000 or the habitats/ spe-cies involved?

> do they understand what thisinvolves and why it is consideredimportant?

> What are their main fears, are theyjustified or based on lack ofinformation?

> And what are their attitudes to-ward nature and Natura 2000?

As regards Natura 2000, do peopleview this with:> hostil ity – conservation and

Natura 2000 are seen as a clearthreat to their livelihood

Perceptions and attitudes towards Natura 2000

> fear and suspicion – concernedthat it could result in restrictionsor interference in local activities

> benign indifference – not con-cerned one way or another (oftenthe most common reaction )

> approval – generally content withthe designation

> accolade – proud that the site hasbeen recognised internationally

Different perceptions may exist ateach site in varying degrees. Deter-mining where the majority lies andhow strong the more extreme viewsare will be useful in selecting the mostappropriate form of communication.

It is surprising how often peopleactually have no idea about thenatural values that exist on their land.They will retort that ‘nature is allaround them’ and ask what is specialabout this particular place. Yet, with

a bit of effort, many becomegenuinely interested. This is animportant first step in initiating aconstructive dialogue. After all, onecannot expect people to want to talkabout solutions if they cannot see theproblem in the first place.

For those that are already hostile orsuspicious of Natura 2000, it isimportant to consider their concernsand address these directly whereverpossible. If not, views can becomepolarised making further discussionsmore, rather than less, difficult.

Pho

to ©

Ram

bow

er M

oor

LIFE

pro

ject

Pho

to ©

UK

lim

esto

ne p

avem

ents

LIF

E p

roje

ct

The contextThe northern tip of Scotland is cov-ered in a single large expanse of blan-ket bog (over 400,000 ha). In the1980s, a new government policy waslaunched to encourage commercialconifer plantations on the peatlandsand within a short space of time over67,000 ha of blanket bog had beenplanted over, resulting in large-scaledrainage and destruction.

This sparked off a bitter and high pro-file conflict between nature conser-vationists and foresters which ran foryears. The local community wastrapped in the middle, they saw theforests as a potential source of muchneeded local jobs even if they hadtheir reservations about whether treeswould actually grow here.

Eventually the number of new plan-tations petered out but the problemon the planted bogs remained.

The activitiesIn 1996, the RSPB, one of the NGOsat the centre of the original conflict,put forward a LIFE-Nature project topurchase a plot of land at the heartof the afforested area so that it couldrestore the site to active boglandagain. Realising that this would be adelicate issue, they decided first tocarry out an attitude survey of differ-ent local interest groups to assesstheir views and perceptions.

Crofters, farmers, foresters, localbusinesses, elected representatives,estate owners and land managers aswell as local recreational clubs andmembers of the general public wereall interviewed.

The survey revealed that the level ofknowledge about the bogs was lowbut that local people did appreciatethem for their unique scenery andgenerally favoured traditional exten-sive land uses. However most inter-viewees viewed nature conservationas a threat and were very wary ofNGOs who they felt were unsympa-thetic to their views and would im-pose further restrictions on theirlegitimate use of the peatlands.

Armed with this information, RSPBand its partners organised a concertedcampaign to inform the local targetgroups about the natural values ofblanket bogs and of their internationalimportance. This was done using avariety of communication tools (post-cards and information packs for everyhouse hold, field trips, excursions,meetings, school outings).

In addition, they contracted localcompanies to fell the trees on thenewly acquired land which injectedover a €1,300,000 into the localeconomy and joined forces with thelocal tourist board to promote the areaas a nature tourism destination.

Bogs: what do people really think about them?

LIFE in action case four

The resultsThe attitudes and awareness surveyhelped the RSPB to better orientatethe project’s communication workfrom the outset to address any mis-conceptions or past hostilities. It alsoprovided a baseline against which tomeasure their success.

The survey was repeated in 2002 andit concluded that local interest groupshad become more knowledgeableabout the peatlands. It also confirmedthat most people had accepted thatnature conservation was a legitimateland use in its own right and believedthat RSPB was now working on theirside to find economic solutions suchas green tourism for the area.

Keywords: attitudes survey,attractive awareness raisingmaterial, green tourism

Pho

to ©

RS

PB

bla

nket

bog

s LI

FE p

roje

ct

Pho

to ©

Ric

hard

Lin

dsay



The contextAfter 60 years of absence, the wolf ismaking a modest come-back inFrance. It is estimated that there arenow 24–26 individuals living in theFrench Alps, essentially around theregion of Mercantour. Their gradualspread has however been met withalarm, particularly amongst agri-pastoral farmers who fear for theirsheep. Yet, an analysis of the dam-age caused by the wolves is relativelyminimal (180 attacks per year – 0.5%loss) and few people have actuallyseen them.

In order to know how best to tacklethis fear and prevent an increase inillegal killings, the Ministry of Environ-ment in France ordered a survey tobe done of people’s perceptions ofthe wolf as part of an on-going LIFE-nature project on the conservation ofthis rare species.

The activitiesSurveys were conducted of around1000 residents and in depth interviewsheld with 23 different interest groups.This revealed a curious and some-times conflicting mix of views andperceptions. Most people wereconvinced that wolves had been de-liberately introduced and completelyover-estimated the population (100sor more). They also feared walkingalone in the mountains despite veryfew reports of sightings.

However, the majority was also op-posed to hunting them. Instead they

want to see humans and wolvesco-habiting. In particular they werekeen that farmers get paid compen-sation for any losses and given helpin installing livestock protectionmeasures (such as guard dogs).

The resultsWith this information, the project de-veloped a communication strategyaimed at dispelling the myths aboutwolf introductions and populationsizes as well as demonstrating whatwas being done to help agri-pastoralfarmers.

One of the most effective tools usedwas a night-time video in which thewolf tries but fails to attack a flock of

Wolves: are they welcome and, if so, under what conditions?

LIFE in action case five

sheep. The guard dogs (which hadbeen given to the farmers by theproject) swiftly and ably chased itaway. This not only appealed to peo-ple’s natural curiosity over these elu-sive animals but also convinced them(and the farmers) that the preventionmeasures are really working.

Keywords: perceptions survey,videos, communication strategy

Pho

to ©

Flo

rent

Fav

ier

Pho

to ©

Flo

rent

Fav

ier

Pho

to ©

Flo

rent

Fav

ier

The contextThe Prackendorfer Moos in NorthEastern Bavaria was once amongst thelargest and best preserved raised bogsystems in Germany. With time how-ever much of the peat was extractedfor local fuel consumption and dam-aged by other land uses. For the last50 years it has served little economicfunction and, on the surface, looksrather unappealing. Yet, even in its de-graded state it is still an important wild-life sanctuary capable of regeneration.

A LIFE-Nature project was funded inorder to restore the bog’s naturalhydrology but, despite its lack ofeconomic interest, the project still metwith local resistance. People could

not understand why so much effortand money was being put into this‘wasteland’ and were irritated that thehigher water levels would make localaccess more inconvenient.

The activitiesThe project decided to tackle this issuehead on. Realising that the localcommunity had only ever seen the bogin its degraded state, it set out to showthem what it used to look like. Theyenlisted the support of local authors,researchers, and the mayor to helppiece together the area’s local historyand past relations with the bog.

The findings were written up in a veryattractive book, with first hand

Developing a sense of pride around Natura 2000

LIFE in action case six

accounts from the older members ofthe village on what life used to be likehere at the beginning of the 20thcentury as well as old fairy tales aboutthe bog. Other sections of the bookconcentrated on illustrating thedifferent plants and animals that makeup the bog and explaining why it isconsidered precious in a Europeancontext, being part of a Europeannetwork of sites called Natura 2000.

The resultThis was the first time a book hadbeen produced on the local historyof the area and because everyvillager received a free copy it soonbecame the local talking point. Localguided walks organised by the LIFEproject became increasingly popular.

Attitudes towards the project soon be-gan to change. Land owners who hadpreviously been reluctant to sell theirshare in the bog were now willing todo so and local farmers agreed to helpreduce the flow of nutrients. It was notlong before Prackendorf Moos be-came the envy of neighbouring villagesand ended up on the local tourist trail.

Keywords: Illustrated book,identifying local history

Pho

to ©

Pra

cken

dorf

Moo

s LI

FE p

roje

ctP

hoto

© P

rack

endo

rf M

oos

LIFE

pro

ject

Pho

to ©

Pra

cken

dorf

Moo

s LI

FE p

roje

ct



Gaining trust and confidence isfundamental to the success of anyinitiative involving decisions overpeople’s lands and livelihoods. Inthe case of Natura 2000, winningpeople’s trust is only possible if agenuine interest is shown in theirviews and if these views are alsotaken into account in decisions overthe future conservation of the site.

People must feel that they aremaking a real contribution and notjust being ‘heard out’.

One of the most effective ways ofachieving this is through the prepa-ration of Natura 2000 managementplans. This has proven to be verypopular in LIFE-Nature projects. Over60% have produced such plans and

begun to implement them before theend of the project, often with the helpof the different stakeholder groups.

The key advantages of these plansare that they:> record all the necessary conser-

vation information on the site itsobjectives, threats, uses, ecologi-cal interests, etc… for all to see;

> clarify the existing land uses andtheir interrelation with natureconservation;

> provide an open forum for de-bate;

> lead to a consensus view on howthe long term managementshould be done;

> create a sense of shared owner-ship amongst all participatinggroups for the final product.

Gaining trust and confidence

Discussion with hunters in France.

Often the level of conflict between theconservation needs and the otherland uses is not nearly as importantas people first imagine. The manage-ment planning process provides anideal opportunity to clarify many ofthe mis-perceptions that often prevail.

The real challenge then comes inpersuading other interest groups tobecome actively involved in improv-ing the conservation condition of thespecies and habitats in question.Finding areas of mutual interest andbuilding a sense of shared ownershipare crucial to this process.

However it is important to rememberthat once the momentum is under-way, it must be maintained. There isnothing more counter productivethan stimulating a lot of support andinterest in developing a managementplan and a shared vision of how thesite should be managed, only to findthat there are no resources to imple-ment it afterwards.

This problem can be addressed inpart by engaging the private landowners and users in practical on-siteconservation work. Not only doesthis help to demonstrate what themanagement practices actuallyinvolve but it also gives the differentgroups an opportunity to learn towork together which can in turn helpto open up further prospects formutual benefit through cooperation.

There are many different ways ofengaging private owners. Some aredown to simply establishing arapport with the owners throughregular dialogue. Others involvefinding an area of common groundor mutual benefit to build on, or,alternatively, identifying ways ofgiving stakeholders public recognitionfor their contribution to conservingour natural heritage.

Pho

to ©

SB

VA

The contextCentral Finland is at the heart of thecountry’s timber industry. Here mostof the forest is in private hands andany restriction on forestry use due toNatura 2000 designation is unlikely tobe well received. So, in a change fromnormal practice, the Regional Envi-ronment Board decided not to imposerestrictions at the outset on Naturaforests but instead to require land-owners to seek prior approval beforeexploiting their forests.

To test how this could work in prac-tice, the Environment Centre joinedforces with the Forest Centre througha LIFE-Nature project to trial the proc-ess out on ten Natura 2000 sites.

The activitiesThe project offered private owners theoption to have forest managementplans drawn up for their forest, whichwould take into account the naturalvalues of the area. With this theywould know immediately what theycould or could not do in their forestand were given advance approval forthese works should they wish to carrythem out at a later stage.

The project officer began by takingeach owner around his site to showhim the natural features of interest andto discuss the conservation implica-

tions with him. Although a time con-suming and labour intensive exercise,this did much to win the owner’s trust,many were indeed relieved to learnthat Natura 2000 did not mean takingall the forest out of production.

The project officer also used forestryexperts to analyse the forest’s com-position and timber value in order todetermine the plot’s economic poten-tial over the next 10–20 years. All ofthis was written up in a detailed man-agement plan for each plot.

The resultsBy the end of the project, privatelandowners became increasinglysupportive of the project’s approachto forest conservation. Many more,even outside the Natura 2000 areas,came to ask for management planson their land.

What was the key to success? Firstly,the one-to-one dialogue help build uptrust between the forester and theproject officer and dispel many of thecommonly held misperceptions aboutNatura 2000. Secondly, it gave the for-esters something in return, an ap-proved management plan whichwould help them to manage their ownforestry resource efficiently and prof-itably. Few would have invested insuch a plan otherwise.

Offering something in return:Natura 2000 in Finland’s private forests

LIFE in action case seven

Pho

to ©

LIF

E p

roje

ct P

ohjo

is S

avo

Pho

to ©

Jur

ma

Luht

a

Pho

to ©

LIF

E p

roje

ct B

orea

l Gro

ves

Keywords: dual purpose manage-ment plan, one-to-one dialogue



ceeded in signing up 87% of thefarmers.

This made it possible for the projectto demonstrate these adapted farm-ing techniques to a wider audience.It organised regular field visits toTermoncarragh for farmers in neigh-bouring regions (around 200 so far)so that they could see for themselveswhat was involved and could talk tothe farmers concerned. The projectalso organised regular outdoor train-ing courses for personnel from farm-ing authorities and associations.

Pho

to ©

Cat

herin

e K

eena

The contextMany grassland areas along the WestCoast of Ireland are of high conser-vation value, particularly for birds. Butbecause they are mostly split up intosmall farm holdings, they provide onlya low economic return. Farmers musttherefore seek additional financialsupport to maintain their extensivefarming practices. The most acces-sible are the agri-environmentschemes, however these are not usu-ally compatible with the needs ofmany of the rare farmland birds.

To address this concern, the NGO,BirdLife Ireland, launched a LIFE-Nature project to demonstrate howfarming practices can be made moreconservation friendly.

The activitiesA Natura 2000 area known asTermoncarragh was chosen as thedemonstration site. Contact wasmade with all farmers in the area topersuade them to test different tech-niques on their land in exchange foran annual management fee. Initially,the level of interest was very low butthe project persisted and eventually,with the help of its partner, Teagasc,the agricultural authority responsiblefor agri-environment in Ireland, it suc-

Using demonstration plots to influence farming practices in Ireland

LIFE in action case eight

Pho

to ©

Joh

n H

oust

on

The resultThis demonstration area is now wellknown across Ireland as a model inconservation friendly farming. Thanksto its high profile and the successof the demonstration training days,decision-makers are now consideringincluding conservation orientatedmeasures in the new Agri-environ-ment schemes as of 2006.

Keywords: demonstration plots, fieldvisits, training workshops

The contextAndalucia is one of the last refugesfor the Iberian lynx. It is estimated thatthere are around 300 individualsscattered in and around 25 Natura2000 sites. Their survival remainsprecarious due to a combination offactors, including scarcity of prey(rabbits), habitat fragmentation andaccidental or illegal killing.

Most of the lynx are found on privateland in large estates (over 1,000 haeach) devoted to hunting and cattleraising. Because of the scale of theseestates, the lynx is not seen as animmediate threat. But the general lackof awareness over its conservationneeds means that many of theproblems the lynx face are notaddressed.

Thus, any communication strategyshould focus on enlisting people’ssupport and active involvement inpositive management measures.

The activitiesWith this in mind, the regionalauthority launched an ambitious LIFE-Nature project in partnership with thehunters association. Its first objectivewas to initiate a large-scale aware-ness raising campaign aimed at

the private estate owners as well aslocal schools, interest groups, andthe general public to help raise theprofile of the lynx in the region.

The second objective was to negoti-ate management agreements withthe private estates to reduce hunt-ing and to improve the habitatconditions for the lynx (e.g. shelters,supplementary feeding stations, eco-logical corridors).

The resultsThanks to these actions, the localcommunities are now well aware ofthe lynx’s presence in their region,and increasingly proud of the fact thatthey harbour one of the last remainingpopulations of this elusive yetattractive species in Spain. This isborne out by the fact that, within thefirst two years, already 80 agreementswere signed with private estatescovering over 1,287 km².

To maintain the momentum, theproject has also initiated an annualaward for owners who make thegreatest effort to manage their estatefor the benefit of the lynx. The winnernot only gets a prize (a sculpture of alynx) but also significant public rec-ognition e.g. through media attention.

Conserving lynx on private estates in Andalucia

LIFE in action case nine

Pho

to ©

Jun

ta d

e A

ndal

ucia

The project’s awareness raising cam-paign has also had Europe-widerecognition. It received a Eurositecommunication award for the qualityof the material produced and for itseffectiveness in raising awareness forthe lynx as well as for Natura 2000.

Keywords: a conservation prize,high profile publicity campaign,partnerships

Pho

to ©

Jun

ta d

e A

ndal

ucia

Pho

to ©

Jun

ta d

e A

ndal

ucia



The contextSituated almost in the middle of theAltantic, the deep waters of theAzores are well known for their abun-dance of whales and dolphins. Inrecent years, several whale-watchingoperators have sprung up, encour-aged by the general growth intourism to the islands.

In order to ensure that their activitiesare compatible with the marine mam-mals and the provisions of Natura2000, a LIFE-Nature project oncoastal and marine Natura 2000 sitesin the Azores set out to develop acode of conduct for all whale watch-ing operations.

The activitiesUsing experiences gathered fromother countries, the project con-ducted its own survey of cetaceanbehaviour during the whale-watchingtours. Its findings were presented tothe regional Tourism authority who inturn organised a series of publicconsultation meetings with the touroperators to discuss the results. Themeetings were constructive and aconsensus was quickly reached. Thenew regulations became law in 2003.

Regulating whale-watching activities in the Azores

LIFE in action case ten

The resultsWhy did it all proceed so smoothly?For two reasons; the tour operatorswere formally consulted on a draftpiece of legislation that could affecttheir livelihood before it became law,which gave them an opportunity toinfluence the process.

Secondly, they also got something inreturn from their involvement. Under

A wealth of highly attractive informationmaterial was produced for this marineproject in the Azores.

Pho

to ©

Fre

deric

o C

ardi

gos

the new law a special four-daytraining course became compulsoryfor all operators. This coveredeverything from training on marineconservation issues and cetaceans,emergency first aid at sea, to promot-ing tours and ensuring customersatisfaction etc. Not only did itex-clude unscrupulous operatorsfrom setting up business overnightbut it also gave the existing operatorsvaluable training on how to improvetheir own businesses.

The LIFE-Nature project played a keyrole here too as it was responsible forpreparing the comprehensive trainingmanual for the course participants.

The project’s high profile publicitycampaign also generated a lot of use-ful information material which theoperators could use for its custom-ers and attracted new clients tothe now booming whale watchingbusiness.

Keywords: mutual benefits,comprehensive training manual

The contextCapercaill ie requires a complexmosaic of forest habitats to survive.Unfortunately there are very few suchforests left in Germany that stillmaintain this mosaic structure. TheBlack Forest offers one of the lastrefuges for this species which is whyit became the target of a LIFE-Natureproject aiming to find ways of recon-ciling the interests of foresters andrecreation groups with those of thecapercaillie.

At 1,493 m, the 80 km state ownedforest on Feldberg is a popular yearround destination for over two millionwalkers and skiers. Forestry is nolonger practiced and this is bad newsfor the species. Without managementthe forest has become too uniform andno longer provides a combination ofopen patches and forests of varyingages and structures.

The activitiesTo address this problem, the projectinventoried and mapped the foreststructure, the species’ presence andthe dense network of walking and ski-ing tracks throughout the area. It con-cluded that only 30–40% of the forestneeded to be in optimal condition forthe species at any one time and thatthis could be adjusted from year to year.

Armed with this information the ben-eficiary, the regional forestry institute,took contact with each stakeholdergroup in turn to see what solutionscould be found to manage the forestappropriately.

Forest management was tackled first.Foresters, hunters and other interestedindividuals were taken on field trips tothe capercaillie hot spots to discussthe species conservation needs onsite. Thereafter, a rolling plan of habi-tat restoration was implemented bythe foresters themselves with constantsupport and back-up of the project.

The same approach was taken withthe tourism sector. Instead of impos-

ing restrictions on hiking/skiing pathsunilaterally, meetings were held withstakeholders to agree on alternativeroutes so that if one trail was takenout of use, it would be replaced byan improved trail elsewhere.

The resultThis dynamic forest managementapproach was greatly appreciated bythe foresters and the local municipali-ties. These groups later supported aproposal to expand the Natura 2000

Creating an open dialogue in the Black Forest, Germany

LIFE in action case eleven

area to incorporate the whole of theCapercaillie metapopulation.

Its success can be put down to theopen and constructive approachadopted towards the different inter-est groups and the project’s ability todemonstrate the species complexmanagement needs in an under-standable way.

Keywords: open dialogue, one-to-one discussions

All

phot

os ©

For

stlic

he V

ersu

chs-

und

For

schu

ngsa

nsta

lt, A

bt.

Land

espf

lege

, A

rbei

tsbe

reic

h W

ildök

olog

ie



Building lasting partnerships

A partnership is a powerful tool fordeveloping long lasting solutions andensuring that Natura 2000 becomesan integral part of the local land usepolicies and practices, rather thansomething distinct or isolated.

Its advantage is that it provides astructured framework in which differ-ent public and private stakeholdergroups can learn to work together andcoordinate their activities.

As a result, the different socio-eco-nomic partners – be they public bod-ies, farmers associations, waterauthorities, conservation NGOs, or

private landowners – have an oppor-tunity to discuss different views onnature conservation issues and tolearn about what others are thinkingand doing.

It also provides a forum in which thelong-term management of the Natura2000 sites can be negotiated andagreed upon.

The subsequent implementation ofthese plans can also be better coor-dinated through a partnership as theyare able to benefit from using the dif-ferent expertise and competences ofeach partner to maximum advantage.

Pho

to ©

New

For

est

LIFE

Par

tner

ship

The contextThe ‘New Forest’ is in fact a veryold forest dating back to the 11thcentury, containing a mosaic ofdifferent habitats. Covering 300 km²,it is a remarkable bio-diversity ‘hotspot’ situated in a heavily populatedpart of southern England.

Around 20 million people visit the NewForest every year, most live locally anduse the area for recreation. They havebecome very attached to ‘their forest’and are reluctant to see it change.Apart from tourism, the area is alsoused for a whole range of other eco-nomic activities, including forestry andfarming.

With such a complicated mix of land-uses, interest groups and administra-tive boundaries it came as no surpriseto learn that most planning activitieswere undertaken in piecemeal fash-ion. Foresters looked after their for-ests, verderers after their ponies, localauthorities after visitor access andconservationists after the biodiversity.

The activitiesHowever, with the designation of theNew Forest as a Natura 2000 sitethe situation had to change. Thelocal authority responsible took thelead in developing a coordinatedmanagement strategy for the wholearea which would take all land-usesinto account whilst placing conserva-tion at the heart of the process.

It set up an wide-ranging partnershipof 10 public bodies, NGOs, interestgroups and stakeholders and appliedto LIFE-Nature for funding. The aimwas to develop one single all-encom-passing conservation plan that allparties could sign up to and feel own-ership of, and then to start putting thisinto practice.

The resultsDespite its complexity, the project wasa success. The partnership proved tobe a powerful and effective frameworkfor cooperation and made the best useof each partner’s skills and expertise.

Thanks to its coordinated communi-cation strategy, it was also able to‘speak with one voice’ which helped

A shared vision for the New Forest, UK

LIFE in action case twelve

further win the support of the generalpublic and local residents for restora-tion work that would otherwise havebeen very contentious and unpopu-lar. People were appreciative of thepartnership’s sustained efforts atpublic consultation and awarenessraising and few are left in any doubtnowadays about the conservationimportance of the New Forest.

As for the partnership itself? It con-tinues to operate to this day, longafter the end of the project.

Keywords: partnerships, best use ofskills, coordinated communicationstrategy

Pho

to ©

New

For

est

LIFE

Par

tner

ship

Pho

to ©

New

For

est

LIFE

Par

tner

ship

Pho

to ©

New

For

est

LIFE

Par

tner

ship



Various public bodies and govern-mental departments have an influenceon the way different land-uses arecarried out within a particular region.Consequently, their policies oftendirectly impact on Natura 2000 sites.

It is vital that these authorities are in-formed about Natura 2000 and itspractical implications. This will notonly ensure that conservation issuesare taken into account in their day-to-day activities but also contributesto a more holistic, efficient and co-ordinated planning approach for theregion as a whole, in which Natura2000 is fully integrated.

Communicating with other publicbodies should theoretically berelatively straightforward sinceNatura 2000 is a government policyenshrined in strong legislation. Inpractice, however, the situation maybe more complex. Conflicting bylawsand procedures, lack of knowledge,maps and limited human resourcesare just some of the problems en-countered.

The communication efforts need there-fore to focus first on raising awarenessof Natura 2000 be it through inter-service meetings and/or targetedinformation dissemination.

Then it will be easier to identify howthe different government policiesimpact on Natura 2000 and whetherthis involves mutual benefits orpossible conflicts. In either case, itshould be possible, having estab-lished a dialogue and learnt of eachother’s policies, to find sustainableand coherent solutions on both apractical and policy level.

Some authorities may in fact be bestplaced to do the conservation workthemselves, because they have theright skills and the necessary influ-ence over private land-users, orbecause they own the land them-selves.

The range of public bodies thatshould be informed about Natura2000 is very broad. It includes theobvious authorities responsible forplanning, water, farming, forestry,fisheries, ports and tourism as wellas the less evident ones such asthose responsible for justice, healthor employment.

Many LIFE-Nature projects have forinstance cooperated with unemploy-ment offices to give the long-termunemployed an opportunity to learna new skill in nature conservationmanagement.

Because Natura 2000 permeatesacross so many policy sectors, itpays to look beyond the obvious gov-ernment departments to find addi-tional avenues for cooperation andintegration.

Pho

to ©

K S

unds

eth

Communicating with otherpublic bodiesIn the rural environment, many authorities have an influence on the way the land is managed and

used. Communicating with these authorities helps to ensure that their activities are compatible

with Natura 2000 and fully integrated at the policy level.

The contextThe Lafnitz is one of the few naturallymeandering rivers left in Austria.However its condition is rapidlydeclining due to the fact that most ofthe habitats along its banks havebeen converted to intensive farmland.Very few patches of the original allu-vial river floodplain habitats are left.Those that have survived are of lim-ited conservation value and servelittle ecological function since they arenow isolated from one another.

For nature conservation, the task wasclear: stop further intensification alongthe river and roll back what wasalready there to beyond the river’snatural corridor. That way, a continuumof alluvial floodplain habitats couldbe re-established and its ecologicalfunctions restored.

But how to achieve this? Buying theland would only work if they boughtall of it, a highly unlikely scenarioconsidering the large number of land-owners and plots involved. The LIFE-Nature project, run by the localconservation authority, decidedinstead to try a different tack.

The activitiesThe beneficiary contacted the localagri-structural authority to discuss thepossibility of using a rural landconsolidation scheme instead to re-distribute the land along the river.

This was originally designed to im-prove farm efficiency by poolingscattered parcels of farmland togetherin a given area and then redistributingit as larger more coherent farmingblocks of equal economic value. Goodnews for farmers, but not always fornature conservation – that is until now.

The local agri-structural authority wassympathetic to the idea. So was thewater authority who saw in this anopportunity to avoid expensive bank-ing works along the river to preventerosion and flooding. With all theelements in place, now all the project

had to do was buy some land in orderto have something to swap.

The resultAlthough the LIFE project had con-ceived the idea, it was the agri-struc-tural authority who ran the rural landconsolidation procedure. Because theauthority was well known among farm-ers and considered an objective andneutral party, the redistribution schemewas accepted without opposition.

This was made easier by the fact thatmost farmers owned long narrowstrips of land perpendicular to theriver. Therefore, to create the riverine

Joining forces with agricultural authorities in Austria

LIFE in action case thirteen

Pho

to ©

BB

L H

artb

erg

corridor, each one only had to giveup a small parcel in exchange for amore manageable area elsewhere.

By the end of the project, continuouscorridors had been created along 50km of the Lafnitz river. This wouldhave been unthinkable had it not beenfor the cooperation and involvementof other government departmentsand the fact that other legislative toolscould be used. In the end all partieswere able to benefit from this cross-sectoral approach.

Keywords: identifying useful non-nature related legislation

Communicating with other public bodies p. 45


The contextThe Latvian coastline used to beUSSR’s frontier onto Europe. Accesswas strictly controlled and most of itremained out of bounds to Latviansfor decades. Perversely, this wasgood news for the coastal habitatsand species which thrived in theseundisturbed conditions.

Since independence, Latvia’s beau-tiful coastline has once again becomea magnet for weekenders and holi-day-makers. There is therefore a realrisk that these recent activities willdamage to the coastal habitats andspecies unless key natural areas are

identified and protected as soon aspossible.

The activitiesThe University of Latvia has the skillsand equipment to do the necessaryscientific surveys and maps, butwanted to work from the outset withthe relevant municipalities along thecoast in order to ensure that itssurvey results could be integrated intothe local land-use plans. It thereforeset up a partnership with 13 munici-palities and the Ministry of Environ-ment and applied for LIFE funding.This would enable each partner tocomplete its share of the work underthe common umbrella of the project.

Thus, the University inventoried thewhole coastline and provided theother partners with the latest surveysand maps for their areas of responsi-bility. It also organised training ses-sions for municipality staff on coastalconservation management issuesand on the preparation of functionalzoning maps.

The Ministry of Environment, for itspart selected the sites to be includedin Natura 2000 on the basis ofthe survey work and providedadditional training on the provisionsof European and national naturelegislation.

Integrating Natura 2000 into territorial land-use plans

LIFE in action case fourteen

As for the municipalities themselves,they appointed local project co-ordinators to prepare the territorialland use plans and were res-ponsible for conducting the publicconsultations.

The resultsThanks to this cooperation and theregular meetings between scientists,government officials and the localproject coordinators from the munici-palities, a coherent approach tocoastal zone management soonbegan to emerge in which Natura2000 is fully integrated. Public con-sultation on the territorial plans alsoprogressed smoothly thanks to thecombination of local consultationbacked up by national policies andtechnical expertise.

Much of this is down to the fact thatthe different partners are not only shar-ing information on a regular basis butare also using the respective skillsand administrative responsibilities ofeach to translate this information intopolicy.

Keywords: project steeringcommittees, local coordinators,training

Pho

to ©

K. S

unds

eth

Pho

to ©

K. S

unds

eth

The contextThe lower reaches of the river Ain inFrance harbour some of the mostintact riverine habitats in Europe andare consequently of high conserva-tion value. However, activities up-stream (such as the construction ofbarrages, gravel extraction etc…)have begun to take their toll on thearea. The river is gradually loosingits natural flow and many of the tribu-taries are drying up. This is not onlybad for nature but also bad for localtourism and farmers who depend onthe river’s water supply.

The activitiesIn a bid to redress this problem, theregional conservation body in theRhone-Alpe province joined forceswith a ‘Syndicat’ or union of localmunicipalities to restore the river’snatural dynamics in accordance withan agreed management strategy forthis part of the river.

The Syndicat represents altogether40 riverine municipalities of which21 are in Natura 2000, and so is anideal partner for gaining generalpublic acceptance over such a largeand complex multiuse area. It lackedhowever the necessary technicalexpertise and so was interested inturn in the cooperation of the regionalconservation body who not only had

technical know-how but also theexperience in applying for Europeanfunds, such as LIFE-Nature.

The project decided to start witha high profile media event to drawattention to the fact that the newlyformed partnership would generatepractical and tangible solutions. Itdecided to clear 24 km of river banksof rubbish. Every commune wasenrolled in advertising this event andrecruiting volunteers. Invitations werealso sent to 27,000 households in thearea. The turn out was substantial withover 600 people coming to help clearup over 12 tons of rubbish.

This was an ideal opportunity to pro-mote the LIFE project objectiveswidely and to advertise the new part-nership between municipalities andconservation authorities aimed atconserving ‘their river’ for the benefitof all. Due to the large media pres-ence, the information was reported onextensively in the local newspapersand it was not long before everyonebecame familiar with the project.

The Syndicat too was delighted bythe fact that their river had been rec-ognised by ‘Europe’ and that a frame-work had been created in which theycould coordinate the different landuse policies.

Joining forces to manage the river Ain, France

LIFE in action case fifteen

Pho

to ©

N G

ouss

ef

Pho

to ©

SB

VA

The resultsThe scene is now set for a construc-tive dialogue over the managementand use of this stretch of the river. Theconservation beneficiary is currentlyundertaking the necessary detailedecological and hydrological investiga-tions in order to put a first set of thepossible management options on thetable for discussion. It will then be upto the municipalities, through theirunion, to consult the different interestgroups and find practical solutions thatwill satisfy all parties.

Keywords: identifying mutualbenefits, using high profile events

Communicating with other public bodies p. 47


The term ‘general public’ covers anincredible variety of people from allwalks of life, with varying interests innature conservation.

An increasing number are concernedabout the loss of nature and want tosee natural areas and wildlife con-served. The majority, however, aremore interested in the scenic land-scapes and in using natural areas forrecreation and tourism. They may notbe aware or interested in their bio-diversity values per se.

This is an important distinction withthe stakeholder groups who, by defi-nition, are directly concerned bylegislative initiatives such as Natura2000 – whether they want to be ornot.

For the general public the key to suc-cess is to find ways of making natureconservation and Natura 2000 directlyrelevant to them.

One way to do this is to providepeople with greater opportunities toenjoy ‘their’ nature. People visitnatural areas for a number of reasons,often unrelated to nature conserv-ation, such as recreation, tourism,discovery, health, education or simplyrelaxing in a beautiful natural setting.This experience could howeverbecome more meaningful if they arealso able to learn a bit about the areathey are visiting.

Once this has been achieved, natureconservation become more personaland relevant to those who have

Pho

to ©

Pel

agia

n is

land

s LI

FE-N

atur

e pr

ojec

t on

sea

tur

tles

Communicating with thegeneral public

enjoyed the experience. This in turnoften encourages people to take amore active interest and involvementin the future of an area they know well,especially if it is under threat.

Such an approach tends to be muchmore effective than the morecommonly used passive channels ofcommunication, such as leaflets andbrochures. This is especially truewhen the areas lack charismaticflagship species. Raising interest inan obscure plant that few have seenis much more challenging if the focusis on that species rather on the naturalenvironment in which it is situated.

Raising the level of awareness andunderstanding of conservation issuesalso encourages a more responsiblebehaviour towards the natural environ-ment and can even motivate peopleto take an active part in conservationwork, either by volunteering to help outat a local nature reserve or by beingthe eyes and ears of society andreporting illegal activities.

The media plays a particularly impor-tant role in this respect through theirnewpapers, TV and radio channels.Not only do they have a significantmultiplier effect in terms of the audi-ences they can reach but journalistsalso excel in presenting the issues inan entertaining, relevant and oftenpersonalised way, as storylines.Although some of the detail may belost, there can be no doubt that themedia is one of the most effectiveways of capturing people’s interest.

The key to communicating with the general public is to find ways to make nature conservation and

Natura 2000 directly relevant to their everyday lives. This can be achieved using a wide variety of

techniques which allow people to discover ‘their nature’ and derive pleasure from it.

The contextUntil recently few people, Italians orotherwise, would be able to tell youwhere the tiny islands of Lampedusaand Linosa, are situated. Even fewerappreciated the fact that these littlegems hosted the only remaining nest-ing sites for sea turtles in Italy. TheSicilian Province of Agrigento decidedit was time to do something about thisand set about placing both the is-lands and the species firmly on themap once and for all.

The activitiesIt believed the most effective way todo this would be to enlist the sup-

Gaining media attention for sea turtles in Italy

LIFE in action case sixteen

port of the Italian media. So, in June2001, it flew 2 representatives of thenational TV and printed press to theislands off the coast of Sicily to showthem what they were doing to pro-tect sea turtles in Italy via the newlyapproved LIFE-Nature project.

The local tour operator, tourism officeand airline ‘Airone’ who operates char-ter flights directly to the islands wereall enlisted to help plan the itineraryso that the journalists would be ableto see as much as possible of theislands and extract the maximuminformation and photo opportunities inthe limited time they had.

Pho

to ©

Pel

agia

n is

land

s LI

FE-N

atur

e pr

ojec

t on

sea

tur

tles

The resultsThe journalists were indeed impres-sed. For many months after the visit,regular articles appeared in all thenational newspapers and several TVspots were shown on the main TVchannels telling the story of the seaturtle, the project and the islands. Thepublicity was so wide spread thattoday most Italians know exactlywhere Lampedusa and Linosa areand immediately associate them withsea turtles. Another positive spin-offhas been the increase in eco-tourismto the islands.

Pho

to ©

Pel

agia

n is

land

s LI

FE-N

atur

e pr

ojec

t on

sea

tur

tles

Pho

to ©

Spa

nish

Cet

acea

n S

ocie

ty,

SE

C

Communicating with the general public p. 49


Raising the profile of bats amongst an international public

LIFE in action case seventeen

The contextOne of the last remaining strongholdsfor bats in Europe is located in theborder region between Belgium, Lux-embourg, Germany and France. Yet,here too, many of their hibernatingplaces – caves, cellars, quarries, bun-kers, old tunnels – are being destroy-ed or disturbed by a multitude ofdifferent human uses. Added to thisis the general public’s widespreaddislike and fear of these animals.

In a bid to change people’s percep-tions and behaviour, a small conser-vation NGO launched, as part of aLIFE-Nature project, an internationalpublicity campaign on the speciesamongst local inhabitants and landusers in all four countries.

The activitiesThis involved, amongst others, a trav-ell ing bat exhibition (visited by200,000 people), several attractivebrochures, two high quality videos aswell as over 150 public meetings indifferent local villages. The aim of thelatter was not only to raise awarenessover the problems affecting batslocally and so encourage responsi-ble behaviour but also to enlist theirsupport in reporting incidents of deador injured bats.

Through this work the project suc-ceeded in generating a lot of mediaattention, with regular articles innewspapers and on TV. This in turnhelped it to reach an even wideraudience and to re-enforce the keymessages about bats.

The resultsSeveral results point to the successof the awareness raising campaign.> the level of vandalism in, and

destruction or disturbance ofhibernating places has been sub-stantially reduced,

> the general public have begunsending in regular bat reports andsightings which has enabled theNGO to prevent further damageand prosecute illegal activities,

> other authorities and user groupsare now more receptive to takingbat conservation into considera-tion in their activities,

> the conservation work is also stillon-going, long after the end of theLIFE project.

Keywords: intensive publicitycampaign, single species focus,responsible behaviour

Pho

to ©

BB

OW

T

The contextThe Federsee is the largest mire inSouth-west Germany. However overthe years, its conservation value hassteadily deteriorated through thecombined effects of agricultural inten-sification, water drainage and increas-ing tourism pressure (over 150,000people visit the area every year).

A LIFE-Nature project was launchedto restore the hydrology of the miresand reorientate existing land uses tomake them more compatible withnature conservation.

The activitiesWith so many different interest groupsimplicated, the beneficiary was con-cerned that there would be a lot ofresistance to their restoration work. Itdecided therefore to hire a profes-sional public relations officer to keepthe project in the public eye through-out its duration.

The PR officer used a whole range ofcommunication techniques to achievethis high profile, ranging from regularmeetings with stakeholders, natureexcursions for locals and tourists (ca300 tours a year involving over 8000people), high profile events, attractivebrochures and interpretative materialon site…

The officer also paid particular atten-tion to establishing good relations

Hiring a public relations officer in Federsee, Germany

LIFE in action case eighteen

with the local media. She knew thatfor items to be picked up in the press,they needed not only to be ‘newswor-thy’ but also presented in a way thatcould be quickly assimilated by jour-nalists and reporters.

The resultsThe use of a dedicated communica-tion professional turned out to be agreat success. The project appearedalmost weekly in the news (around150 articles in local and nationalnewspapers a year, over 500 intotal!) and on the radio (ca 25 inter-views) which, together with the other

communication activities, created agroundswell of goodwill and con-structive dialogue.

As a result, the restoration work wentvery smoothly with little local resist-ance, which is highly unusual inGermany for projects of this kind.Recognising this, many other LIFEprojects began organising study toursto Federsee to learn how to plan theirown communication activities.

Keywords: hiring a Public relationsexpert

Pho

to ©

Fed

erse

e LI

FE p

roje

ct

Pho

to ©

Fed

erse

e LI

FE p

roje

ct

Pho

to ©

Fed

erse

e LI

FE p

roje

ct



Awareness raising material suchas brochures and leaflets are themost commonly used form of com-munication for both the generalpublic and stakeholders. Almostevery LIFE-Nature project has pro-duced a leaflet about their site andtheir activities.

Leaflets are easy to do and can reacha wide audience both locally and fur-ther afield at a relatively modest cost.In this respect they are particularlyuseful at drawing people’s initialattention to a problem or issue.

There are however a number of dis-advantages which are worth bearingin mind. The main one being that theinformation goes only one way. Intoday’s environment of informationoverload, there is no way of beingsure that the person receiving the

leaflet will actually read it, and if theydo whether they will be influenced byits contents.

One way around this problem is toexplore different ways of presentingand packaging the information. Thiscan for instance be incorporated intoother magazines or publications thatalready have a good circulation anda faithful readership (eg on tourism,farming, or the local ‘weekly’).

Alternatively, it could be turned intosomething useful for the target audi-ence such as a calendar, postcards,guides on nature walks (or even ont-shirts which are in fact walkingposters).

It is also worth exploring the electronicmedia as more and more people areconnected to the internet and have CD/

DVD players. The advantage of thisform of information is that it can be pre-sented in a wide variety of ways. Adigital book, for instance, can includevideo material, interactive Q and As,storylines etc… which are usually muchmore interactive and enjoyable than aclassic brochure. Once developed,they are also relatively cheap to repro-duce and particularly effective with theyounger generation.

Videos are sometimes also effective,especially if they are able to revealanother angle to the site or speciesthat would not normally be availableto the general public, for instancestories about people’s lives and howthey interact with their environment,or close ups of rare and elusiveanimals.

Producing awareness raising material

The contextA LIFE-Nature project was launchedin 2001 to reintroduce the goldeneagle to Ireland. The species hadbecome extinct several decades pre-viously due to a combination ofpersecution and lack of food but nowthe conditions were again ripe for thespecies to make a come back in theKillarney National Park in CountyMayo.

The activitiesRecognising that the presence of thisspecies might provide additional ‘pull-ing power’ for local eco-tourism busi-nesses and in a bid to announce theproject to as wide an audience aspossible, the beneficiary contacted

the national airline Aer Lingus to seeif they would be interested in includ-ing an article about the golden eaglein its in flight magazine. Because ofthe high quality photos and news-worthiness of this recent reintroduc-tion programme, the airline was happyto oblige.

The resultFor several months the Air Lingus inflight magazine carried an 8 pagespread about the species, itsconservation needs and the effortsof the project. Thanks to this theLIFE project was able to reach anextensive audience that might other-wise never have read about suchissues.

Read about the golden eagle as you fly to Ireland

LIFE in action case nineteen

Many LIFE projects also found annualcalendars to be a very popular formof information material. Not only doesthis give people something they canuse but it also provides a means ofpassing on different messages (onea month!) about the project and thesite.

The Austrian LIFE-Project on theOdere Drau river produced just sucha calendar. This showed wonderfulclose-ups of the river’s wildlife, attrac-tive landscapes, and pictures of peo-ple using and enjoying the river. Everymonth another story was told aboutthe river and why it is useful to con-serve it.

It was not long before many house-holds had put these attractive calen-dars up on their walls.

Using calendars to get the message across in Austria



Making nature discovery enjoyable

There are several ways to makenature enjoyable and interesting tothe general public. Events, forinstance, are an ideal means of reach-ing a larger audience, as they can begeared to the whole family.

On many Natura 2000 sites, guidedwalks and open days are commonpractice and are usually very popu-lar. People tend to be curious aboutthe history and interests of a sitenearby, and enjoy having an oppor-tunity to walk safely through a wildarea that they might not otherwiseknow existed or dared to venture into.

Alternatively, people may want toexplore an area on their own. Theirexperience can be enhanced by pro-viding them with good access andvisitor amenities, such as naturetrails, interpretation panels andvisitor centres. At the same time thesecan ensure that the environmentpeople come to enjoy is preserved.

Developing good trails and interpre-tive material however requires a lotof planning and forethought. Muchhas been written about how to max-imise the impact of the material onthe people concerned whilst still pro-viding them with an enjoyable andstimulating experience.

Unfortunately, many site managerstend to ignore this wealth of experi-ence. As a result they sometimescreate dull information boards thatone feels one ought to read themrather than one wants to read. In abid to pass on as much informationas possible, the authors end up creat-ing interpretive signs that are verywordy, abstract and too technical.

The visitor might read one or two butfew will read them all. Not only is thisa lost opportunity but it may alsoaffect the visitors enjoyment ofnature – it’s a bit like being back atschool.

The same goes for exhibitions in visi-tor centres – with the wealth ofmutlimedia and IT facilities nowadaysthere are many ways of producingexhibits which stimulate all thesenses, (sight, touch, smell, sense,hearing) and provide interest andentertainment for all the family. Theseexhibitions also have the advantageof being able to introduce and explaina complex story.

Often the best way is to put oneselfin the shoes of the visitor and theirfamilies. If this was about a differentsubject would you be interested?

Finally, a word should be said aboutthe increasing interest in members ofthe public wanting to volunteer fornature conservation activities in theirspare time. More and more people arekeen to make a personal contributionto conserving nature and learn moreabout this subject, or simply want tobe able to work outdoors and meetother like-minded people.

Whatever the motivation, it is wellworth tapping into this preciousresource, not only does provide anextra pair of hands but it also helpsto re-enforce the public’s increasinginterest in nature conservation issues.

Pho

to ©

Lee

Val

ley

Reg

iona

l Par

k A

utho

rity

Pho

to ©

G B

reve

t

Pho

to ©

Flo

rent

Fav

ier

The contextRambower moor is a biologically richmire situated in one of the moreisolated and economically depressedparts of eastern Germany. A LIFE-Nature project was adopted in 1998to restore the area and bring thevaluable grasslands under the rightkind of management. Establishingcommunication with local inhabitants,such as farmers and fishermen, wasstraightforward – they could be count-ed on to help.

However, the project also wanted toreach out to the inhabitants who livednearby. If they appreciated the valueof the mire, they could help generatea more positive local attitude to theotherwise ‘unexciting’ area and sohelp reduce problems like disturbanceand dumping of rubbish.

The beneficiary used the opportunityof a local summer festival in thevillage of Boberow, one of the settle-ments along the rim of the moor, topresent the project to a wider localaudience. Reasoning that a standwith technical documents would notattract many people, the project man-ager tried a different tack.

She offered ‘dragonfly-cocktails’,‘peat-soup’ and other bizarre culinarytreats and had a colleague dress upas a ‘Moor-Witch’ and tell ghoststories to the youngsters. She alsocontributed to organising a smalltheatre performance on an open airstage overlooking the moor. Thisauditorium was surrounded by promi-nent LIFE information stands whichbecame the focal point for peoplebefore and after the performance.

Theatre performances at Rambower Moor, eastern Germany

LIFE in action case twenty

The annual cultural event has gonefrom strength to strength, it is regu-larly reported on in the press and hasbegun to attract the interests of pro-fessional theatre groups, such as theRostock theatre company who seethis as an opportunity for students topractice their acting skills in front ofa live audience.

Although hard to measure directly, theapproach seems to have paid off.There was little local opposition to therestoration work and Rambower mooris now ‘on the map’ both for itsnature interest and for its annualtheatre performances. People livingin the area are now proud that thisdesolate looking moor has becomethe focus of so much attention.

Pho

to ©

Ram

bow

er M

oor

LIFE

pro

ject



Imperial eagles: the new stars of a topical radio series in Hungary

LIFE in action case twenty-one

The contextHungary is one of Europe’s laststrongholds for the rare Imperialeagle, yet, as elsewhere, its survivalis increasingly threatened by a widerange of conflicting activities such asthe construction of new power linesand rapidly changing land uses.

A New LIFE project was funded in2002 to address these concerns in astrategic fashion across Hungary.One of the project’s objectives wasto raise the overall level of awarenessand interest for this impressive birdamongst the general public andspecific interest groups.

The activitiesThe beneficiary organized a series ofworkshops, leaflets, open days etc….to help draw attention to the plight ofthe Imperial Eagle. All weresuccessful but somewhat short lived.Something was needed to keep thebirds in the public eye on a morepermanent and regular basis. Thisdrove the project team to the idea ofasking for the support of two famousradio broadcasters.

Boros Lajos and Bochkor Gaborrun a popular programme called‘Bumerang’ on the national radio

every week day morning in which theydiscuss different topical events andnews items in a humorous and non-political fashion. Their stories areinterspersed by music and regularfeedback from the audience via textmessages and phone-ins. So popularis their show that an estimated5–10% of Hungarians tune in everyday (over 1 million people).

The broadcasters were asked if theywould be willing to do a regular spoton two new imperial eagle chickswhich had been named after them asthey flew from their nests into theHungarian landscape. The DJs werehappy to oblige and created regularanecdotal stories around the birds’latest sightings, sometimes based on‘double attendres’ with their extracurricular activities. Members of theaudience were also encouraged tosend in SMS’s if they had spotted thebirds in their area. (yes, Bochkor waslast seen coming out of a wine cellarin Tokaj!)

The resultsThe plight of these two individualchicks not only captured people’simagination but also opened upadditional opportunities to air someof the more serious issues aboutImperial eagle conservation inHungary on the radio.

Since the stories began thebeneficiary has also noticed aremarkable difference in people’sattitudes towards their work. Nowwhen they go out into the field, peoplecome up to them and ask how Borosand Bochkor are getting on. This wasin strong contrast to the originallyhostile, or at best cool, reception theproject used to get when visitingdifferent stakeholders.

Pho

to ©

Ivan

Dem

eter

:

Pho

to ©

Ivan

Dem

eter

:

New imperial eagle chicks,Boros and Bochkor.

The contextIn 2002, a consortium of NGOs andpublic authorities set out to conducta strategic LIFE-Nature project tobring the bittern back from the brinkof extinction in the UK. Focussing on19 sites across England, it aims torecreate a network of suitablereedbed habitats to allow the existingminute population (just 43 territorialmales) to expand.

One of the main problems the projectfaces in communicating the work tothe public is that bitterns are shy andelusive, and sometimes live inunattractive reedbeds near aband-oned industrial sites and run downurban areas. One of the project sites,Lee valley for instance, is located onthe outskirts of London and made upof a former gravel pit, three tertiarytreatment lagoons and a once derelictand polluted floodplain. Little surprisetherefore that people are notimmediately attracted to these areas.

The activitesThe project set out to raise the profileof the Lee Valley reedbeds bypromising to reveal a rare European

The guided walks and events around the elusive Bittern in the UK

LIFE in action case twenty-two

bird in a setting perhaps not normallyassociated with rare wildlife. It didthis by organising a series of events,such as guided walks, open days,and an annual Birdwatching Fair. Theevents were heavily advertised bothlocally and nationally and receivedgood media coverage, there was evenan item on BBC national lunchtimenews.

The events turned out to be extremelypopular. The rare and elusive bittern,with its loud booming sounds andinternational reputation had capturedpeople’s imagination and drew themto Lee Valley. Many came out ofsimple curiosity ‘what could be so

Pho

to ©

Lee

Val

ley

Reg

iona

l Par

k A

utho

rity

Pho

to ©

Lee

Val

ley

Reg

iona

l Par

k A

utho

rity

good about these derelict areas thatpeople are are willing to spend somuch money here’?

The resultsSo far, over 8000 people haveparticipated in the regular guidedwalks, weekend open days and theannual Birdwatching Fair. One of thehighlights is of course the very highsuccess rates in seeing a rare bitternin the wild from the watchpoint at theend of one of the trails. Many peoplego away pleasantly surprised by theirday out and eager to see thisinternationally important bird return totheir local area.

Pho

to ©

Phi

l Vin

es



The contextThe area of Yllas in northern Finland,lies beyond the Arctic circle. It is oneof the few true wilderness areas leftin Europe, covering vast expanses offorests, mires and fens of outstand-ing natural beauty. This majesticscenery attracts many walkers,cross-country skiers and others whogo to enjoy the ‘great outdoors’.

Much of the area in Yllas has recentlybeen declared a Natura 2000 site(over 300 km²). In order to ensure thatthe increasing number of visitorsremains compatible with the area’sfragile habitats, a LIFE-Nature projectset out to develop a tourism manage-ment strategy for the area. Thisincluded the design of a series ofnature trails that would channelvisitors away from the more sensitiveareas whilst still providing them withan enjoyable experience.

The activitiesThe project put a lot of thought andeffort into developing trails and inter-pretation panels that would be inter-esting, stimulating and enjoyable forthe reader. They based their choiceon the results of a preliminary visitorsurvey which recorded people’s maininterests and level of understandingon nature issues.

By the end of the project, 7 trails ofdiffering length (47 km in total) hadbeen developed. Each was given aparticular theme – e.g. predators trail,Enchanter’s trail, the Cloudberry path,

the starry way…. Interactive panelswere placed along the way, some-times carved into a tree or hiddenunder a box to encourage people toactively search for the information. Inbetween the panels were other formsof interpretation such as animal foot-prints crossing the board walk or ananimal olympics where people couldcompare the abilities with those ofother animals.

The resultsThe trails were so popular that theymade headline news. Feedback fromvisitors showed that they were unre-servedly positive about the trails andthe interpretive material produced.Many were even quoted as sayingthat this had made their holiday morememorable and enjoyable. It was notlong before the local tourism entre-preneurs started asking the projectfor courses on nature conservationissues in order to satisfy their clientsincreasing interest in this area and itsnature values.

Turning a nature trail in Lapland into an enjoyable journeyof discovery

LIFE in action case twenty-three

Pho

to ©

Kei

jo T

aski

nen,

Arc

tic Id

ea

Pho

to ©

K S

unds

eth

Pho

to ©

xxx

xxx

xxxx

Pho

to ©

K S

unds

eth

The contextA lot of skill goes into creating aninteresting exhibit in a visitor centre.People have been experimentingwith different techniques for years tofind the best ways of providing anenjoyable learning experience for allthe family. The exhibits in the Bearmuseum of the Adamello BrentaNational Park in Northern Italy haveput many of these experiences togood use.

The activitiesLocated in a restored 14th centurymanor house, the exhibits tell thestory of the bear in the Italian Alps.Six different themed rooms have beenequipped with a gamut of interactiveequipment and gadgets to arousecuriosity and stimulate all the senses.

One can follow the tracks of a bearthrough a simulated forest whilstlistening to the tales of a lumberjack,visit its den and experience what itwould be like to live here, learn about

the myths and legends surroundingthis impressive animal and watcha puppet show of four peoples’encounter with a bear. In each roomthere are also ample opportunities viaquizzes and multimedia programmes,to test one’s knowledge about thebear and to learn more about what isbeing done across Europe to savethis species.

Through a new LIFE-Nature project onthe reintroduction of the brown bearinto Italy a new exhibit has recentlybeen created. With only three bearsleft in the Italian Alps, the project setout to import a further 11 bears fromSlovenia and reintroduce them to thepark.

The exhibit tells the story of how thereintroduction was done. It includesa video game giving people anopportunity to learn how to radio-track bears and identify their where-abouts. It also introduces the visitorsto each of the bears in turn through

Using the multimedia to explain the plight of the brown bearin the Italian Alps

LIFE in action case twenty-four

individual videos and stories. Peoplecan then follow the progress of theirchosen bear on the internet once theyhave left the park. Today’s headlinenews: Gaspar had lost its radiocollar and Bel was spotted down bythe lake.

The resultsIt is difficult to judge the success ofthese interpretation facilities but regu-lar visitor surveys have confirmedthat people are generally satisfiedwith their visit to the centre (in fact asignificant number are now just com-ing to the centre without visiting theNational park).

The conservation message alsoseems to be getting through: whenone of the reintroduced bears waskilled, it made headline news in all thenational newspapers, something thatwould have been unheard of a fewyears ago.

Pho

to ©

Par

co N

atur

ale

Ada

mel

lo B

rent

a

Release of Gaspar.



The contextFor centuries, the loggerhead turtlehas been returning to nest on theisland of Crete and, despite intensivetourism development, the beaches inthe north of the island are still amongstthe most important nesting sites forthe turtle in the Mediterranean.

However with over 40 km of coastlineand several hundreds of thousandsof tourists every year, the task ofprotecting these nests from damageis daunting.

The activitiesThe NGO quickly came to the idea ofusing volunteers to help them out.They advertised in across the EU andreceived an overwhelming response.Before long, over 200 volunteershad signed up. Many people wereindeed willing to spend their summerpatrol-ling beaches and helping withturtle conservation work in exchangefor food and lodging at subsidisedrates.

This massive human resource wasput to effective use on the beachesboth in protecting new nest sites andin engaging with local inhabitants andtourists alike to raise awareness of theturtles on Crete’s beaches and toexplain what people can do to help.

The multi lingual volunteers alsomanned the information kiosks inmain towns and gave regularpresentations and slide shows in theevenings at hotels along beach. Onaverage around 600 presentationswere given each season reaching anaudience of over a quarter of a milliontourists (10% of all tourists to theisland).

The resultsThe regular presence of volunteersevery summer on Crete’s northernbeaches has not only done a lot toreduce the number of damagednests but has also helped raise theoverall level of awareness amongsttourists and businesses alike. And ofcourse when they return homecountries they take their messagesand experiences with them, therebyspreading the information evenfurther afield.

Volunteers help to save sea turtles on the island of Crete

LIFE in action case twenty-five

Helping out at the local Natura 2000 site

Volunteers can be equally importantcloser to home for instance on a localnature reserve. In southern Belgium,a LIFE Nature project, run by theNGO RNOB, enlisted the supportof local volunteers to help restorethe alkaline fens of the region. Itorganised 51 ‘management days’ toencourage people to come and helpout in their local Natura 2000 site.Special events were also organisedfor schools, scouts groups and thelocal village.

Pho

to ©

Arc

helo

nP

hoto

© A

rche

lon

Pho

to ©

RN

OB

These work camps proved to be verypopular, some 470 people turned outduring the course of the project tolend a hand. Some became socommitted to the sites that they setup their own permanent volunteergroup to ensure the longer termmanagement of the areas. All are nowalso very familiar with Natura 2000and are able to explain this importantnew initiative to others they maymeet.

Finally in this chapter, a word mustbe said about involving schoolchildren in nature conservation, beit through classic educational chan-nels such as schools or through youthgroups and organisations.

The impact of this communicationwork may be hard to measure butit has long been recognised as afundamental part of any awarenessraising policy.

There are several ways to go aboutbringing nature issues to the atten-tion of children. The most classic isto involve the local schools andteachers in this. Many LIFE-Natureprojects have helped organise out-

Educational activities

ings for local schools to show themaround the site. Some have gone onto produce educational material fordifferent age groups on nature for usein lessons.

Alternatively the local nature reservemay provide a useful backdrop forother educational topics like health,safety, recreation, geography etc…

Another interesting option is to teamup with local youth organisations toorganise special events around thesite or to reach the children throughthe parents e.g. by organisingevents that are child friendly. Oftenif the kids are happy, so are theirparents.

Pho

to ©

Jun

ta d

e A

ndal

ucia

Many LIFE projects have used games toexplain the ecology and conservation of

rare species – such as the Iberian lynx(above) and the bearded vulture (below).



The contextAs its name implies the rare LakeConstance forget-me-not exists onlyon the shores of this important lake atthe foothills of the Alps. A LIFE-Nature project has begun to restore

the eroding banks along the shore linebut for the plant to be able to re-estalish itself here permanently effortsare also needed to address theincreasing problem of reacreationalactivities along the lake.

As the beaches are heavily used inthe summer, especially by youngpeople, for barbecues, campfires andparties, it decided to enlist the sup-port of local school children and youthgroups to help get the conservationmessages across and encourageresponsible behaviour.

The activitiesThe beneficiary contacted theBregenz city youth department to seeif they would be interested in produc-ing a video about the conflict betweenrecreation and conservation in theproject area. Here they found sixteenagers who volunteered to helpproduce the video after school.

The project manager gave the girlsan introduction to the problem and anumber of conflict situations wereplay-acted to ‘get a feel’ for bothsides’ attitudes and motivations. Nextwas a site visit to scout for goodshooting locations (the girls wereamazed how many people they spot-

Producing a video on activities around Lake Constance

LIFE in action case twenty-six

ted breaking the bye-laws). A seriesof trial interviews and camera shootswere also done to help perfect thegirls’ camera and interview tech-niques.

Now they were ready to start filmingfor real. The first proper shoot beganwith interviews of the conservationauthorities and the site warden. Nextcame days of filming anglers andbeach parties – the girls soon discov-ered that although there were plentyof people on the beach, it wasn’t hardfinding someone who agreed to havethemselves and their opinionsrecorded on film. Within a month thegirls had gathered enough material tostart editing, choosing the film musicand recording the voice-overs.

The resultsThe final film was shown at theAquarama 2003 lake festival where itwas seen by thousands of people.Such was its success that the projectdecided to show it at the localschools and youth clubs, to gener-ate discussion on the conservationissues raised. The video was alsoshown at a day-long event organisedby the regional government dedicat-ed to the theme ‘young peoplemaking a mark’. This gave the girlsan opportunity to present their workto a 300 strong audience, includingmany mayors and the President of theregional government.

Encouraged by this initially positiveresult, the project went on to enlist thesupport of pupils at the Bregenz highschool to help design and develop thesoftware for the project’s website. Thistoo had positive spin-offs. In Spring2003 the two pupils responsibleentered the LIFE homepage in anAustria-wide competition for schoolsand won third prize.

Pho

to ©

Am

t de

r La

ndes

haup

tsta

dt B

rege

nz

Pho

to ©

Am

t de

r La

ndes

haup

tsta

dt B

rege

nzP

hoto

© A

mt

der

Land

esha

upts

tadt

Bre

genz

The contextOne of the biggest problems facingthe urban heaths in Dorset, southernEngland, is that they are regularly seton fire by young arsonists. This is notonly destructive for the fragile heathsbut also puts a considerable strain onthe police and fire brigade’s limitedresources (last year a heathland firecost €300,000 to put out).

As in any big city there are inevitablyproblems with delinquency, drugsand petty crime and the police areconstantly having to explore newways of tackling crime preventionamongst the young.

The activitiesRecognising that much of the answerlay in how children and young teen-agers perceive the heaths, a LIFE-Nature project run by a consortiumof different interest groups, includingthe fire brigade and the police force,set out to elaborate an education pro-gramme for school children based ontwo new UK government initiatives:one on citizenship and the other onhealthy schools.

In the case of the first, the idea is touse people’s irresponsible attitudesto the Dorset heaths to help schoolchildren develop an understanding oftheir roles and responsibilities ascitizens. In the case of the healthyschools initiative, the heaths providean ideal environment in which toencourage healthy outdoor pursuitsfor children.

The project started out by giving talksto 23 schools (6,000 pupils) in thevicinity of the heaths. This is done asa good cop, bad cop routine wherethe project education officerexplained all the benefits to be hadfrom the heaths and the wildlifepolice officer explained what happenswhen juveniles are caught damagingthe heaths and how prison sentencescan affect their future prospects intheir adult live.

The project is now developing aseries of educational packs to beintegrated into the school curriculum.These are currently being tested outon teachers before being producedon a larger scale. Altogether 40 dif-

Dorset heaths

LIFE in action case twenty-seven

ferent lesson plans will be developedtogether with handouts, diagrams,pictures, videos and an educationalgame called the ‘fire fighter’

The resultsEducation is a long term process andit is unlikely that the impact of theproject can be measured immediately,although there are already some posi-tive signs. For instance since theproject started the number of reportedfires has already gone down by 54%!The ‘good cop, bad cop’ routine isclearly having an effect.

Pho

to ©

Pet

er C

reed

Pho

to ©

Cla

ire D

insd

ale

Pho

to ©

Cla

ire D

insd

ale



Targeting younger children

LIFE in action case twenty-eight

Many projects also target youngerchildren in their information cam-paign. The LIFE-Nature project on theBalearics shearwater, for instance,produced a CD ROM with an inter-active multimedia programme foryoung school children on the islandof Formentura to learn about thehabitats of this rare bird on theirisland. They can listen to stories

about the bird, watch videos, answera quiz and play games.

One of the games is about Miquelet,a young shearwater, who needs to getfrom the sea to his nest without fall-ing foul of any of the dangers thatlay in his path. The CD Rom, and a16 page comic about the bird, weredistributed to all 18 schools on theisland and has proven to be very suc-cessful in raising awareness for theshearwater amongst children andadults alike.

On the other side of Europe, in theAustria, WWF dedicated one of theissues of its youth magazine, PandaClub, to its LIFE project on the pro-tection of wetlands in the Waldviertelarea. This was distributed to all pri-mary schools in the district.

The way the information was pre-sented is particularly interesting. Theecology of the Waldviertel is ex-plained using a kind of treasure huntwith clues and questions throughoutthe magazine. This was followed upby a real outdoor treasure hunt onwetlands in which 100 children par-ticipated.

ANNEXES



The Commission has organised anumber of communication activitiesto raise the profile of Natura 2000across Europe. The most importantones are listed below. It is well worthspending a bit of time to look at theseand to order copies of brochures etcas they could provide useful materialon Natura 2000 that can be readilyused or adapted for your owncommuni-cation activities.

> GREEN DAYS: Natura 2000… nature for you!

For the last couple of years, the Com-mission has run a ‘Green Days’ ini-tiative to promote events in andaround Natura 2000 sites across Eu-rope. Every year, site managers (LIFEprojects included) are encouraged toorganise simultaneous events at theirlocal Natura 2000 site in order to givepeople living close to these areas anopportunity to learn about and enjoy‘their nature’.

Last year some 400 events were heldin 15 countries attracting over 22,000people. Activities include guidedwalks, exhibitions, workshops, opendays etc. The Commission has enlist-ed the support of the organisationEurosite to help coordinate the futureGreen day events which will now runthroughout the year.

Eurosite has created an onlinedynamic calendar in which all Greenday activities can be recorded. From

this it is possible to promote eventsacross Europe and search for activitiesin particular regions. Event organisersreceive a Green Days toolkit, contain-ing leaflets, posters, hats, stickersetc… about Natura 2000.

Details on www.eurosite-nature.org

> The Natura NetworkingInitiative: local partnershipsin action

A second initiative has just beenlaunched called the Natura Net-working Initiative. This is designed topromote good practice in themanagement of Natura 2000 sites,and to raise public and stakeholderawareness of Natura 2000. TheNatura Network Initiative (NNi) willcover the 25 EU Member States andincludes the above Natura 2000Green Days project.

The NNi aims to identify and promoteexamples of good practice in sitemanagement and encourage theformation of Local Area Partnerships.Where they already exist, it aims toprovide additional resources to assisttheir development/promotion (seebox).

The Initiative has been contracted outto a consortium of organisationsinvolving Eurosite, Europarc and theEuropean Landowners Association.Full details can be found onwww.eurosite-nature.org

> Brochures and otherinformation material onNatura 2000

The Commission is producing its ownseries of brochures on Natura 2000which can be directly down-loadedfrom the website or ordered as papercopies from the address given below.These include:

> A general brochure on Natura2000 as a European Network (16pages)

> A more detailed brochure aimedat stakeholders giving informationon the different European policiesand funds that are relevant (24pages)

> A brochure on the Natura 2000sites in each of the six biogeo-graphical regions (8 pages each)

> A selection of posters on Natura2000 illustrating various differentthemes

> The Natura 2000Newsletter

Finally, the Commission produces aNatura 2000 newsletter twice a yearin five languages to review certaintopical themes in greater detail andprovide regular updates on thelatest happenings in Europe thatconcern Natura 2000. In addition,there is a regular update of theNatura Barometer showing theprogress made by Member States indesignating sites for the network.

The newsletter is published in fivelanuages free of charge and can bedownloaded or ordered from thenature website.

For a full update on these currentinitiatives consult the EuropeanCommission nature website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/home.htm

NNi agreementsThe following is description of the 7 agreements to be established for the NNi.The agreements are voluntary and ranked in order of (anticipated) commitmentand difficulty, easiest to achieve to most difficult.1. Submitting basic information about the site to the Natura 2000 Agreements

Page.2. Organising at least one Green day event per year.3. Promoting the Natura Network Initiative (NNi) at the local level.4. Committing to a site twinning.5. Networking at the national/European level.6. Involving local stakeholders in the management planning process – creating

a local area partnership.7. Agreeing to become an NNi ambassador.

ANNEX 1 The Commission’s activities on communicatingon Natura 2000


ANNEX 2 Reference list of LIFE-Nature projects featured ascase studies in this report

Case one (p.29)Analysing landowners concerns of bears in Greece

Case two (p.30)Sharing scientific information on cetaceans in Spanish waters

Case three (p.31)A room with a view: raising the profile of the Natterjack toad in Estonia

Case four (p.33)Bogs: what do people really think of them?

Case five (p.34)Wolves: are they welcome and, if so, under what conditions?

Case six (p.35)Developing a sense of pride around Natura 2000

Case seven (p.37)Offering something in return: Natura 2000 in Finland’s private forests

Case eight (p.38)Using demonstration plots to influence farming practices in Ireland

Case nine (p.39)Conserving lynx on private estates in Andalucia

Case ten (p.40)Regulating whale-watching activites in the Azores

Case eleven (p.41)Creating an open dialogue in the Black Forest, Germany

Case twelve (p.43)A shared vision for the New Forest, UK

Case thirteen (p.45)Joining forces with agricultural authorities in Austria

Case fourteen (p.46)Integrating Natura 2000 into territorial land-use plans

Case fifteen (p.47)Joining forces to manage the river Ain, France

Case sixteen (p.49)Gaining media attention for sea turtles in Italy

Case seventeen (p.50)Raising the profile of bats amongst an international public

Case eighteen (p.51)Hiring a public relations officer in Federsee, Germany


Case nineteen (p.53)Read all about the golden eagle as you fly to IrelandUsing calendars to get the message across in Austria

Case twenty (p.55)Theatre performances at Rambower Moor, eastern Germany

Case twenty-one (p.56)Imperial eagles: the new stars of a topical radio series in Hungary

Case twenty-two (p.57)The guided walks and events around the elusive Bittern in the UK

Case twenty-three (p.58)Turning a nature trail in Lapland into an enjoyable journey of discovery

Case twenty-four (p.59)Using the multimedia to explain the plight of the brown bear in the Italian Alps

Case twenty-five (p.60)Volunteers help to save sea turtles on the island of CreteHelping out at the local Natura 2000 site

Case twenty-six (p.62)Producing a video on activites around Lake Constance

Case twenty-seven (p.63)Dorset heaths

Case twenty-eight (p.64)Targeting younger children

Name LIFE (“L’Instrument Financier pour l’Environnement” / The financing instrument for the environment)

Type of intervention Co-financing of actions in favour of the environment in the European Union and candidateaccession countries.

LIFE is made up of three branches: “LIFE-Nature”, “LIFE-Environment” and “LIFE – Third countries”.

Objectives> with a view to sustainable development in the European Union, contribute to the drawing up,

implementation and up-dating of Community environment policy and legislation;> explore new solutions to environmental problems on a Community scale.

Projects Any natural or legal person, provided that the projects:> match the priorities laid down at Community level and contribute to the objectives listed;> are submitted by technically and financially reliable participants;> can be technically carried out and offer a good cost-benefit ratio.

Types of project> LIFE-Nature projects are nature conservation projects which contribute to the protection of species and maintaining

or restoring of natural habitats according to the “Birds” and “Habitats” Directives.> LIFE-Environment projects are demonstration projects which contribute to the development of innovative and

integrated techniques and methods, and to the further development of Community environment policy. The projectsconcern at least one of the following 5 themes:• integrate environmental and sustainable development considerations into land use development and planning;• promote the sustainable management of ground- and surface water;• minimise the environmental impact of economic activities;• promote the prevention, reuse, recovery and recycling of waste of all kinds and ensure the sound management of

waste flows;• reduce the environmental impact of products.

> LIFE – Third countries projects are technical assistance projects which:• benefit the Community, through their contribution to the implementation of regional and international policies and

agreements;• promote sustainable development at international, national or regional level;• bring solutions to serious environmental problems in the areas concerned.

Implementation The Member States or third countries send the Commission the proposals of projects to beco-financed. The Commission sets the date for sending the proposals annually and reaches a decision on these.It monitors the financing and follow-up of the implementation of the LIFE actions. Accompanying measures enablethe projects to be monitored on the ground and, in the case of LIFE-Nature, to encourage certain forms of cooperationbetween similar projects (“Co-op” measure).

Period covered (LIFE III) 2000 to 2004.

Funds from the Community approximately €638 million of which €300 million to LIFE-Nature, €300 million to LIFE-Environment and €38 million to LIFE-Third countries.

ContactEuropean Commission – Directorate-General for the EnvironmentLIFE Unit – BU-9 02/1 – B-1049 Brussels – Fax: +32 2 296 95 56Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/life/home.htm

ISSN 1725-5619

14

KH

-AJ-0

4-0

01

-EN

-C

life-nature: communicating with stakeholders and...

Documents