Funding failure: Most of Ireland’s biodiversity spend goes on schemes that have little impact – TheJournal.ie

IRELAND IS NOT spending enough on protecting our under-threat biodiversity and the majority of what we are spending is going on schemes that are failing to have an impact.

Inpart one of this Noteworthyinvestigationinto the state of Irelands biodiversity, we found that the natural world remains significantly impacted by the human hand through habitat loss, degradation, overexploitation, pollution, and climate change.

So what is the State doing to ensure funding and resources are in place to turn the tide on biodiversity loss here in a meaningful way?

Noteworthy has found that:

Russelstown wood beside the Poulaphouca Reservoir SPA in Co Wicklow Source: Niall Sargent/Noteworthy

Sizeable resource gap

Since the late-2000s, international organisations and researchers have identified inadequate finance as a major reason for the failure to halt the decline in biodiversity.

Globally, it is estimated that between78 and 91 billion is spent on biodiversity finance every year. At face value, this appears to be an exorbitant amount of money.

Yet, a look at the spending on supports which are potentially harmful to biodiversity estimated by the OECD at 500 billion per year puts this figure into perspective.

This global trend is seen in Ireland too. Since the Central Statistics Office (CSO)started closely tracking environmental supports in 2010, 8 billion has been paid out on those measures, compared to over 20.5 billion in fossil fuel subsidies, much of which goes to sectors that are known to have negative environmental impacts.

A review of global biodiversity financing by the OECD last year found that there are also significant gaps in information on biodiversity spending, warning that up-to-date and accurate estimates are needed to establish a baseline from which governments and other stakeholders can track biodiversity finance trends over time.

Prior to 2010, there was no obligation on governments to monitor biodiversity-related expenditure so, to bridge this gap, the UN introduced a new requirement that all parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) report on biodiversity expenditure.

A new CBD strategy to monitor finance for biodiversity is, for the first time, driving efforts to change this dynamic by accurately tracking finance for conservation through National Biodiversity Expenditure Reviews (NBERs).

Difficulties in monitoring finances

According to a 2021 paper from UCD and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS), these reviews have the potential to introduce a blueprint for national biodiversity governance.

In Ireland, researchers from UCD, with support from the NPWS, have started to track biodiversity-related expenditure, with a 2018 report showing, for the first time, a detailed and comprehensive picture of the landscape of biodiversity finance in Ireland.

And the findings were stark, revealing a sharp decline in the resources available for biodiversity conservation since the economic crash in the late 2000s.

The Irish review found that both direct and indirect spending on biodiversity conservation was 1.49 billion between 2010 and 2015, with overall spending declining by 31% during this six-year study period.

On average, according to the expenditure review, Ireland spent 250 million per year on biodiversity or 0.13% of GDP, well short of the 0.3% of GDP recommended for OECD countries by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Farming and biodiversity interlinked

Some 80% was spent on agri-environmental subsidies, the review found, with 1.1 billion, or 75%, of all funding over the six-year window examined sourced from the Department of Agriculture.

These findings were backed up by a review of finance arrangements for biodiversity conservation in Ireland released last year that found 75% of funding over a seven-year window between 2014 and 2020 went to agricultural schemes.

The majority of this went to GLAS, an agri-environmental payment scheme that the States most recent audit found has had a modest climate and biodiversity impact that is outweighed by agricultural expansion.

According to a co-author of both UCD reports on biodiversity funding, environmental economist Dr Craig Bullock, it is not surprising that there is a large funding pot for these schemes as farming has tremendous influence on whatever goes on in relation to trends in biodiversity in Ireland.

Much of ourprotected landscape is fragmented- compared to 41 other European states, we have the5th lowest connectedness scoreacross the bloc and much of our biodiversity is found outside of protected nature areas in farmland and rural landscapes.

The problem, Bullock said, is that were not really achieving the biodiversity outcomes as evaluations of GLAS and its predecessor schemes show that any positive on-farm changes are rather peripheral against a background of continued intensification of farming.

Role of NPWS severely hindered

In comparison to funding for agri-ecology schemes, the 2018 biodiversity expenditure review demonstrated that, between 2010 and 2015, the National Parks and Wildlife Service only received 10% of State biodiversity funding.

The additional 2020 UCD study presented the downside of these long-term funding gaps in stark terms, stating that the chronically low budgetary allocation to state bodies responsible for biodiversity protection does not allow these organisations to fulfil their EU-mandated environmental objectives.

According to biodiversity experts who spoke to Noteworthy, the level of funding received by the agency has to change, and fast, given the complex and wide-ranging role that it has, described recently in the Dil as the most important piece of the jigsaw in pulling all of the different ecological strands together.

The agency, for example, provides the scientific evidence underpinning biodiversity protection in Ireland and reports on the status of habitats and species to the EU and UN.

It also has a wildlife crime enforcement role and a statutory role in assessing planning and licences applications which may impact on the natural world, as well as a myriad of other communications, administrative and funding roles.

The 2020 UCD report found, however, that the NPWS receives inadequate financial support to conduct these activities despite a recent funding bump from the new coalition Government involving the Green Party.

The recent increase is well welcomed but it follows a period when the budget has been declining for many years, said UCDs Bullock. Unless you have a fundamental amount of expenditure, you cant get beyond just supporting the people and parts of NPWS in their jobs during their basic day to day activities.

If you really want to achieve biodiversity gain, the department needs more people on a permanent basis to be working on a greater range of activities because what were doing is really just standing still at the very best. The funding [the NPWS] is getting by on is really minimal.

The NPWS itself identifies the issues in the terms of reference for an ongoing review of the agency that states its resourcing remained severely challenged for a number of years after the 2008 2013 financial crisis and that, relative to 2008, total funding in 2020 still has a significant recovery to make.

The NPWS has never once been under the same governance structure for 10 consecutive years, and has constantly shifted from one ministerial brief to the next, with prominent voices in the ecological and conservation network calling for a more stable position, including the Irish Wildlife Trusts Pdraic Fogarty.

Speaking before an Oireachtas committee earlier this year, Fogarty said that the agency should be made independent to build itself up again, communicate the science, tell Departments what needs to be done all in the knowledge that its structure is not going to be shifted, moved or undermined after the next election cycle.

The 2020 UCD financial review came to a similar conclusion, with co-author Dr Shane McGuinness telling Noteworthythat a key issue is how the agency has been hollowed out for the last decade or more to the point that it has to outsource chunks of their work because they dont have the internal capacity. The NPWS review is ongoing.

Other agencies facing difficulties

Another organisation that has an important role but lacks long-term stability is the National Biodiversity Data Centre (NBDC) that is responsible for a range of activities on top of its key role as collator and disseminator of biodiversity data in Ireland.

Established in 2006, it is also responsible for the All-Ireland Pollinator Plan, roundly lauded as a success story in mainstreaming the protection of bees and butterflies across a range of sectors.

Despite its title and role as the national node for biodiversity data, the NBDC is actually operated by an outsourced private company that has operated under short-year service agreement contracts awarded by the Heritage Council. The current contract is set to expire at the end of 2022, at which time another tender process will be run.

Speaking before the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action in May 2021, the Director of the Centre Dr Liam Lysaght said a key impact of this situation is that staff have a short-term perspective as they are consistently on short contracts.

It is an insecure time for the staff of the data centre and we hope that by the end of next year there will be a more positive and secure future for us, he said. The Heritage Council has established a task force to identify the best model to make the centre a more secure entity that Lysaght identified as a very positive step.

The National Biodiversity Forum has also called for the centre to be strengthened and expanded to establish biodiversity monitoring as a long-term national priority and protect it from electoral cycles and changing political agendas.

In a statement, the Heritage Council said it agreed that, while having the advantage of not formally committing the exchequer to open-ended financial obligations to support the NBDC, the service-level contract model has considerable drawbacks.

The most noticeable issue, it said, is that the model is a a short-term mechanism for a service which requires long-term planning and does not allow the centre to establish as a legal entity with governance responsibilities such as sourcing additional funding for its work.

This service requires a structure which consolidates its position on a permanent basis and has the flexibility and authority to realise its full potential, the council said.

The work of the task force is on-going and it is expected to make recommendations on the future structure of the NBDC in late 2021 or early 2022.

Example of high nature value farmland that can help support species like Corncrake Source: Liam Loftus

Results-based model the way forward

Another solution offered up by biodiversity experts is a landslide shift in agri-environmental funding from a prescriptive model based on actions rather than outcomes to a measurable, results-based approach to protect a range of iconic species traditionally associated with farmland but now under threat from agricultural intensification.

According to a comprehensive State report to the UN in 2019, the shift to a more intense monocultural grass-based model has influenced a decline in various species, including birds, bees, butterflies and insects impacted by the drive to ever higher levels of productivity characterised by a loss or neglect of hedgerows, farmland edges and scrub.

Results-based models require a lot of early work such as developing scoring cards to assess habitat quality, setting up knowledge exchange groups for farmers, embedded community engagement and scientific research. But there is a huge appetite for them, according toJohn Carey of the novel results-basedCorncrake LIFE project.

Farmers regard results-based payment systems as fair and equitable, Carey said. Its a paradigm shift to put the farmer back in charge of their own destiny rather than just prescribing actions for them to follow.

The five-year project running from 2020 to 2024 seeks to protect the ground-nesting corncrake, the decline of which is closely linked to changes in farming methods such as the move away from hay-making to silage, drainage of damp ground for grassland, and reseeding of mixed-species grasslands with more productive grasses.

According to Carey, the species decline is symptomatic of a rapid change in land use across Ireland. They have literally been pushed to the edge of their range. If the corncrake disappears, along with them will go a myriad of lesser known species that inhabit the same ecological niches.

Under the project, there will be direct conservation work on around 1,000 hectares of land to address these pressures and enhance the habitat, including predator risk management and the re-establishment of traditional farming practices, with the ultimate aim to help boost the species population by 20% by 2024.

What we hope to build is not just habitat, but the knowledge and skills to create and maintain the habitat and ensure the best possible outcome for both the birds and the landowners who conserve them, Carey said.

There is a sense among the communities of the importance of protecting the integrity of local areas while seeking to create a sustainable future for families. Finding these synergies is the key to conservation success, and we are lucky that so many of the local communities are engaged with us on this already.

Corncrake being handled by members of Corncrake LIFE team Source: Corncrake LIFE

More funded needed to make a real difference

Although heavy on admin costs, UCDs Shane McGuinness said that such results-based models are effective as they focus on tangible targets where you can actually see the 10% increase in hedgerows or the five metre margins around your fields.

Ireland is looked at in terms of a lighthouse for this model due to the early success of the Burren LIFE project in the mid-2000s, according to McGuinness, the first major farming for conservation project in the EU.

Unfortunately, he said, results-based schemes still make up only a tiny fragment of agricultural supports to date.

The rest of the EU look at the Burren and say thats fantastic but that is a drop in the ocean in Ireland. Thats shown in our rivers. Its shown in our corncrakes, our curlews, our marsh fritillaries and pearl mussels.

According to the 2020UCD study that McGuinness co-authored,this problem is linked to the under-resourcing of the NPWS. By failing to invest in the agency and depriving it of capacity, McGuinness said that the State is preventing the acquisition of additional EU grants or the spending of existing EU allocations which are not fully claimed.

This issue was further expanded upon by the UCD reports other author, Dr Craig Bullock, together with NPWS staff, in a paper released earlier this year.

The paper found that restricted sources of finance have trapped the NPWS in a cycle of continually fighting to survive while operating below the critical mass to be effective.

This includes funding under the EU LIFE programme, according to McGuinness, that has funded many results-based projects to date, including the corncrake project.

Were involved in huge chunks of funding that are given over and were at risk of not spending those allocations. And this is millions of euros, McGuinness said.

So with a lot of these funds, they either go under-spent, under-claimed or over-administered, which is tragic, really, given how limited the funding is already for biodiversity.

Data released by the Department of the Environment, that assists potential applicants with the process, shows Irish projects received 100 million in LIFE funding between 1992 and 2019. We have created a table herewith details on all Irish projects.

While the use of indicative national allocations were only introduced in 2007 and subsequently discontinued in 2018, a Noteworthy analysis shows that Ireland underspent on its allocation by 12 million over a 10-year window between 2007 and 2017.

The Department said that these indicative allocations were not intended to suggest secured funds or allocations per Member State and that the quality of the project was always considered the overarching criterion governing the project evaluation and award process.

Another issue identified by experts tied to resource issues is the lack of accounting for natural capital in State plans and programmes.

Taking stock of our natural capital

It is estimated that more than half of the worlds economic output US$44 trillion of economic value generation is moderately or highly dependent on nature.

In 2008, the NPWS looked at the economic benefits of biodiversity in Ireland, putting the value of national ecosystem services at over 2.6 billion euro per year.

For example, pollinators contribute over50 million to the Irish economy, while our natural, unspoilt environment was cited by 82% of visitorsas an important reason for visiting Ireland in 2019, a year that brought in over 5 billion from overseas tourism.

Yet, according to the 2020 UCD biodiversity finance review, there is only a modest acceptance by some departments of their dependence on natural capital, even in those sectors with high dependency on these services.

According to Trinity College Dublin ecologist Catherine Farrell, up until now, we havent integrated nature into decision making at all with policy moves based almost purely on economic metrics without actually considering how we can work with the broader set of wealth that we have.

We need to bring out more knowledge of where the ecosystems are and what theyre doing. That is a powerful tool, she said. The tide lifts all boats [and] the tide for restoration should lift all habitats and all species because theyre all connected.

Farrell is a member of the INCASE research team, a multi-disciplinary team funded by the EPA made up of specialists in ecology, economics, mapping, accounting and agriculture, working together to measure the positive contributions of our natural world.

This involves gathering data about the extent and condition of ecosystem stocks, the services and benefits they bring, and then aligning this detail with a system of national accounts to better integrate nature into the decision-making process.

Farrell said that there is still a widespread lack of understanding of how natural capital accounting works. People think it just sticks a price on nature which doesnt have to happen at all.

If we dont have a natural capital dashboard alongside other metrics such as health and economic trackers, we neglect to account for the key thing that underpins the success of all societal and economic targets nature. Not tracking stocks and flows in nature has gotten us where we are [today], she said.

Catherine Farrell (l) on field research with other members of the INCASE team Source: INCASE

A lack of joined-up thinking

For example, in order to know the societal values generated by ecosystem services, we first need to know what condition the ecosystems are in, how they have changed or been altered over time, and the ways in which communities will benefit from their protection.

In the INCASE projects study of the 18,000 hectare Dargle catchment released in April 2021, however, it stated that progress on ecosystem accounting remains limited.

The challenges identified in this case study reflect those identified in other studies and include the lack of data the absence of targeted and reliable time-series data on structure and function, as well as the need for agreed reference levels, the study found.

A 2020 paper from the Royal Irish Academy on the value of Irelands agri-ecosystem services also found that there is still a lack of data for certain ecosystem services that can have knock-on impacts for conservation work.

View post:

Funding failure: Most of Ireland's biodiversity spend goes on schemes that have little impact - TheJournal.ie