Knowledge of impacts of climate change on biodiversity in Metropolitain France
CCBio
Geographical coverage
| Geographical scale of the assessment | National |
|---|---|
| Country or countries covered | Metropolitan France |
| Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name |
The assessment covered France and neighbouring countries (Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Italy and Spain) |
Geographical scale of the assessment
National
Country or countries covered
Metropolitan France
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name
The assessment covered France and neighbouring countries (Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Italy and Spain)
Conceptual framework, methodology and scope
Assessment objectives
- To produce an overview of impacts of climate change on biodiversity in Metropolitan France
Mandate for the assessment
Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy (MEDDTL)
Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB)
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted
http://docs.gip-ecofor.org/libre/CCBio_SyntheseFinale_112011.pdf
System(s) assessed
- Marine
- Coastal
- Inland water
- Forest and woodland
- Cultivated/Agricultural land
- Grassland
- Mountain
Species groups assessed
Ecosystem services/functions assessed
Provisioning
- Water
- Timber/fibres
Regulating
Supporting Services/Functions
Cultural Services
Scope of assessment includes
Drivers of change in systems and services
Yes
Impacts of change in services on human well-being
No
Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed
Yes
Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment
Yes
Timing of the assessment
Year assessment started
2009
Year assessment finished
2010
If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish
Periodicity of assessment
Unknown
Assessment outputs
Website(s)
Report(s)
Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)
Journal publications
Training materials
Other documents/outputs
Tools and processes
Tools and approaches used in the assessment
- Modelling
- Geospatial analysis
- Indicators
Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component
Key stakeholder groups engaged
The number of people directly involved in the assessment process
10-100
Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge
- Scientific information only
- Resource experts (e.g. foresters etc)
Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment
Assessment reports peer reviewed
Yes
Data
Accessibility of data used in assessment
Free access of the literature in the Data Base http://ccbio.gip-ecofor.org/index.php?sujet=projets
Policy impact
Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions
- Setting up a technology watch of impacts of climate change on biodiveristy
http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/ONERC-PNACC-complet.pdf
Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment
No
Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews
Capacity building
Capacity building needs identified during the assessment
Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity
Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Workshops, Communication and awareness raising
How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders
Knowledge generation
Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment
A long-term disability of observation of ecosystem structure, diversity and functioning.
A lack of links between modelisation, experimentation and observations.
Links between research and management must be developed.
How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders
A summary paper (synthesis) of the evaluation has been draw up for policy-makers.
