Upload
jessica-hutchinson
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Economic impact of nature conservation RSPB Experience
[email protected] The Royal Society for the protection of Birds RSPB
EEA Copenhaguen 5th October
Le Menu
• Nature vs Economy – The omnipresent myth
• RSPB work and findings
• Methodology
• Economic impact of Natura 2000
• Conclusions
The omnipresent myth
Nature conservation constrains economic development
Nature conservation implies closing an area and not allowing anyone nor any activity to take place there.
“Buy a sporting estate and outlaw deer, grouse, sheep, cattle and commercial forestry and you make keepers, beaters, shepherds, farmers and foresters redundant. They use the pubs and shops, their wives provide b&b, their children fill the local schools, the guns leave heavy tips and stay in hotels. One warden and a couple of scientists are not going to fill this economic or social vacuum.”
The Field, Oct 2000
The omnipresent myth
Nature constraints the economy?
RSPB reserves employ stalkers, farmers,
foresters, reserves managers...etc
Habitat management and restoration requires lots
of work related to habitat maintenance, habitat
restoration...etc.
Wildlife tourism can bring substantial benefits
Growing number of studies illustrate significant
levels of employment supported by natural
environment
RSPB work - Nature Reserves
RSPB reserves support more than 1000 FTE jobs in UK local economies
£19 million spending by RSPB and a million visitors / year.
7.1 jobs / 1,000 ha of productive land
Many of these jobs in remote rural areas – most in less productive land.
All reports available from: www.rspb.org.uk
RSPB Work – Spectacular species
The presence of sea eagles brings £1.5-1.7 million to the Isle of Mull (West Scotland) every year
290,000 people visit Osprey watching sites per year bringing £3.5 million to nearby areas.
Other relevant bits of info
In Scotland’s €6,610 million / year tourism economy, 14% of visitors are specifically interested in wildlife
Natura 2000 has had a significant positive regional economic impact in four Austrian regions
4 National Parks in Spain receive 6.5 million visits / year
Methodology
Collection of visitors data
- spending, movements, motivations, etc
- number of visitors to site
- definition of ‘local economy’
Methodology
Use of economic multipliers
• £1 spent supports 23 – 33p of local income
• Expenditure £30-40,000 supports 1 FTE in local economies in the UK // £37,000 = 1 job
Economic impact of N2000
What level of economic activity could be supported by properly managed N2000?
Need to quantify:
- employment supported by N2000 sites (staff, contractors, agriculture, forestry...)
- employment supported by visitors
Economic impact of N2000
Contribution of such study to EU Biodiversity strategy:
- Aid / ease implementation of Natura 2000 by dispelling the myth
- Improve communication with key sectors by putting Natura 2000 into Lisbon agenda terms
- Contribute to secure adequate funding by informing EU budget review 2008 (?)
Economic impact of N2000 – Next steps
Define/discuss methodology:
- develop multipliers for representative set of EU habitats & states
- are there better ways to do this? (ie. annual turnover of N2000 dependant business)
Conclusions
Nature conservation can make a positive contribution to economic activity.
Nature conservation protects wildlife AND economic assets:
• positive impact on local economies • attracts visitors and their money• enables investment• supports jobs in remote rural areas
Conclusions
Managing land to preserve EU natural heritage is compatible with other economic sectors and supports long term employment for EU citizens
Gaining an idea of the level of economic benefits of Natura 2000 would make a valuable contribution to EU biodiversity conservation