1. No category

Green Infrastructure Training Manual
Background Information
Why Green Infrastructure: halting biodiversity loss and contributing to sustainable
growth
Land use change, urban sprawl and the
associated deforestation and loss of natural
habitats, new linear transportation and energy
infrastructure and damming of rivers are
among the recently increasing phenomena
and trends which are contributing to the
advance of habitat fragmentation in Europe.
Habitat fragmentation and loss in turn are the
most significant causes of the current
biodiversity crisis. Being the continent most
transformed by humans, Europe should put
special effort into safeguarding its last
remaining patches of natural habitat. Habitat
fragmentation reduces the land available to
wildlife and changes its parameters by
increasing the proportional share of edge to
interior habitat (Figure 2), it decreases the
average size of habitat patches and increases
patch isolation. It is estimated that 30% of
European territory is moderately to highly Figure 1 Fragmentation in numbers (EC 2012)
fragmented, a quarter of European species
being threatened with extinction and 82% of EU’s land remaining without protection
(as only 18% is covered by the Natura 2000 Network (Figure 1, EC 2012)).
Figure 2 Fragmentation associated habitat quality change (EEA 2011)
What is Green Infrastructure?
"Green Infrastructure is a strategically planned
network of natural and semi-natural areas
with other environmental features designed
and managed to deliver a wide range of
ecosystem services. It incorporates green
spaces (or blue if aquatic ecosystems are
considered) and other physical features in
terrestrial (including coastal) and marine
areas. GI is present in rural and urban
settings." (European Commission 2013)
Green infrastructure encompasses natural and manmade structures and solutions
which facilitate the flow of ecosystem services from nature to the people and preserve
our natural capital. It promotes the use of marginal land as well as making use of all
possible land for biodiversity – roofs,
pavements and other urban infrastructure
elements. As Figures 3 and 4 illustrate, GI
includes both natural and artificial habitats,
protected areas and sustainable use zones.
Figure 3 GI components
In terms of environmental protection, it
addresses both the problem of habitat loss and
habitat fragmentation by enhancing ecological
connectivity. However, biodiversity is only one
of the focuses of Green Infrastructure. The
European Commission emphasizes that natural
solutions not only protect and enhance the
environment but also contribute to sustainable
socio-economic growth by increasing societal
well-being and promoting smart growth.
Natural solutions have been demonstrated to be
cheaper and more durable in the long run.
Figure 4 GI elements II
For the EU, green infrastructure constitutes an especially valuable tool for
environmental protection and climate change adaptation in a multi-stakeholder
setting. Under Target 2 of the 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, the EU committed itself to
deploy green infrastructure and restore a minimum of 15% of Europe’s degraded
ecosystems. In 2013, the European Commission adopted a Green Infrastructure
Strategy on Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital, whose aim is to draw the attention to
ecosystem services that, non-monetized by our economy and society, often remain
unacknowledged or undervalued. By focusing on the benefits that nature renders for
us, we can create the necessary impetus and invest into solutions that preserve and
generate ecosystem services.
One of the main ideas behind green infrastructure is its multifunctionality – rather
than serving a single purpose such as e.g. of constituting a roof over a person’s
household, green infrastructure can at the same time provide thermoregulation, water
retention, habitat for wildlife and space for recreation and many more (Figures 5 and
6).
Human shelter

Figure 5 Traditional versus green roof functions
Human shelter
Thermoregulation
Urban heat reduction
Noise absorption
Air purification
Water retention
Water purification
Wildlife habitat
Pollination
Recreation
Aesthetic value
Employment












natural resources
water management
climate regulation and climate change
adaptation
health and air quality
investment and employment
tourism and recreation
research and education
land and property values
resilience
conservation benefits
Figure 6 GI benefits II
Local or town Regional and EU level
/city scale
national scale
Descriptor
Natural and seminatural
ecosystems,
such
as
pastures,
woodland, forest (no
intensive plantations),
ponds, bogs, rivers and
floodplains,
coastal
wetlands,
lagoons,
beaches,
marine
habitats
Extensive agricultural
and forest landscapes,
large marsh and bog
areas,
rivers
and
floodplains,
shorelines/coastal
zones
Freshwater systems, Core areas –
major river basins, outside
mountain
ranges, protected areas
regional sea basins
Local nature reserves,
water protection areas,
landscape protection
areas, Natura 2000
sites
Regional and National
Parks and wilderness
zones
(includes
Natura 2000 sites)
Ecological Networks Core
areas/
with
cross-border protected areas
areas, incl. Natura
2000 network
Restored areas which Restored
were
before types
fragmented
or
degraded
natural
areas, brownfield land
or disused quarries;
transitional
ecosystems due to land
abandonment
or
regeneration processes
High nature value
farmland and multiuse forests (such as
watershed
forests);
protection
forests
(against avalanches,
mudslides, stonefall,
forest fires), natural
buffers
such
as
protection shorelines
with barrier beaches
and salt marshes
ecosystem Restored Landscape Restoration
systems covering a zones
substantial part of
agricultural/ forestry
areas
and
industrialised sites,
including
crossborder areas
Extensive agricultural
landscapes,
sustainable
forest
management
on
regional and national
level,
functional
riparian systems
Transboundary
Sustainable use
landscape features on zones
river
basin
or
mountain range level,
sustainable
coastal
and
marine
management zones
related
to
the
respective sea basin
Street
trees
and Greenways,
green
avenues, city forests/ belts,
metropolitan
woodlands,
high- park systems
quality green public
spaces and business
parks/ premises; green
roofs and vertical
gardens;
allotments
Metropolitan
areas Green urban and
with substantial share peri-urban areas
of high quality green
areas in Europe,
including
coherent
approaches in crossborder urban zones.
and orchards; storm
ponds and sustainable
urban
drainage
systems; city reserves
incl. Natura 2000
Hedgerows,
stone
walls,
small
woodlands,
ponds,
wildlife strips, riparian
river
vegetation,
transitional
ecosystems between
cropland,
grassland
and forests
Multi-functional,
sustainably managed
agricultural
landscapes, riparian
systems
Supra-regional
Natural
corridors, substantial connectivity
share of structure- features
rich
agricultural,
forestry or natural
landscapes
Eco-ducts,
green
bridges;
animal
tunnels
(e.g.
for
amphibians),
fish
passes, road verges,
ecological power line
corridor management
De-fragmented
landscapes, improved
areas along transport
and energy networks,
migration corridors,
river continuum
European-wide
transnational
defragmentation
actions
Figure 7 GI on various scales (EC 2013)
EU financing options on GI
Green infrastructure is widely
convergent with other EU policy
objectives such as sustainable
cities, societal health, climate
change adaptation, disaster risk
management and more broadly
safeguarding natural capital and
conservation of land, soil, water
and nature. In order to achieve
optimal results, it should be
financed both from public and
private sources through risk
management and sharing and
providing technical assistance.
Figure 8 outlines the EU funds
under
which
green
infrastructure may be financed.
Figure 8 GI funding sources
or Artificial
connectivity
features
GI Cases
Łódź Blue-Green Network, Poland
• Type: Local government case study
• What: Restoration of an urban river system,
• Who: University of Lodz & the European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology
• Outcomes: ecosystem restoration, biodiversity enhancement, increased water filtration and
retention, improved recreational grounds
Watershed conservation and biodiversity protection in Agrivair, France
• Type: Business case study
• What: Financial, technological and research support for sustainable farming. Watershed
conservation projects are planned.
• Who: Nestle Waters
• Outcomes: Protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services, emloyment generation
Territorial System of Ecological Stability, Czech Republic
• Type: Policy maker case study
• What: Hierarchical enforced ecological network
• Who: Government of the Czech Republic
• Outcomes: Ecological connectivity protected and managed at a variety of scales
Neusiedler-Ferto Lake Cooperation, Green Belt, Austria & Hungary
• Type: Agricultural manager case study
• Who: Neusiedler See - Seewinkel and Ferto-Hansag National Parks
• What: Supporting traditional agricultural practices, wildlife friendly livestock grazing
• Outcomes: Protection and management of grassland habitats and the associated species
Restoration of Comana Wetlands, Romania
• Type: Environmentalist case study
• What: Wetland habitat restoration, constructing educational and tourist infrastructure
• Who: Two local governments and a nature park
• Outcomes: Restored ecosystem, revenue from tourism and ecological education
Additional Reading
Check out
CEEweb’s new Green
Infrastructure
Knowledge Hub:
www.ceeweb.org/work-areas/priorityareas/green-infrastructure
for more cases, information
and further reading and to
find out how we contribute
to building GI across
Central and Eastern Europe
Environmentalist:
Infrastructure: Sustainable Investments for the Benefit of Both People and Nature
Natural England’s GI page
Urban sprawl in Europe – the ignored challenge
Local government:
CEEweb and ECNC’s Brochure on GI: Enriching our Society through Natural Solutions
The Value of Green Infrastructure. A Guide to Recognizing Its Economic,
Environmental and Social Benefits
Planning for a healthy environment – good practice guidance for green infrastructure
and biodiversity
Business:
Green Infrastructure case studies
Green infrastructure’s contribution to economic growth: a review
The future of investment: green infrastructure
Policy maker:
EU Green Infrastructure Strategy
The multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure
Design, implementation and cost elements of green infrastructure projects
Guide to Multi-Benefit Cohesion Investments in Nature and Green Infrastructure
Green Infrastructure and territorial cohesion
Green Infrastructure implementation and efficiency
Green infrastructure Workshop
The individual exercises should be carried out in small groups of 5 to 6 people; they
will then come together and form
a plenary group for presentations of
their work. Each group should
therefore nominate rapporteurs
who will feedback to the plenary. It
is important that the overall
moderator/facilitator keeps the
groups to time (and each exercise is
allocated and approximate time in
the text below). It is important that
the seating arrangements can be
modified to allow the groups to sit
at separate tables.
Each group will need a supply of
flipchart paper and up to 4 coloured
flipchart pens. Ideally a flipchart should be available in order that the groups can place
their flipchart papers on it for the feedback to the plenary.
Exercise 1: Re-designing the landscape I. - How to design?
Objective: The objective of this exercise (assignments 1 and 2) is to train your ability
to think of the landscape in
terms of the various types of
benefits it offers to society,
and its permeability, and to
understand that multiple
services and goods can be
provided by the same
landscape
feature
(for
example a woodland, a park,
a field, an industrial estate);
and identification of possible
GI projects based on this
landscape
analysis
(assignment 3).
Method: Visualisation
Time allocation: 45 min
Assignment 1 – mapping the landscape
 For this you will first jointly draw the landscape according to the instructions
and then assess the values or benefits each of the features and list the
connectivity elements you included in your landscape.
 On a flipchart sheet spread out on the table, draw, as preferred, a map in 2D
map view or 3D landscape view, of an imaginary or real ( if one of the
participants would like to take the initiative) landscape with 10 – 15 landscape
features (see annex X for example of landscape elements). For the feasibility
of the exercise please keep the total number under 15. Standard landscape
pictures and Google maps might be used for inspiration if needed, but it is
better for the group to pool their imagination.
 Identify each map feature (e.g. broadleaved forest, road, village, wetland etc.)
with a number or code to refer to the Landscape feature valuation form
Annex 2;
 Don’t forget the connectivity aspect: consider and identify the corridors and/
or bottlenecks in the landscape for the movement of species (e.g. mammals,
amphibians and reptiles, invertebrates, etc.) and mark these on the map as
well;
Expected result: A map of the landscape with the listed features.
Assignment 2 – Evaluating the landscape features
 Fill out the Landscape feature valuation form based on a rapid valuation
using the best judgment of the group. Do not go into details. For a natural full
grown forest, biodiversity value is obviously higher than for an industrial
estate. It is these differences that should become clear in the form. Describe
values in terms of 0=nil, 1= low, 2= moderate, 3= high, 4= very high (5
categories);
 For each map feature think of the ecosystem services it provides (e.g. a forest
feature would typically provide fibre and fuel (wood), water regulation,
climate mitigation etc.). Refer to Annex X (page x), if needed;
 Try and keep the momentum going in a brainstorm-like way. Do not discuss
individual suggestions or ideas in first instance, but just write down all
suggestions from the group;
 If time permits, go through the list and discuss the ecosystem services one by
one and agree on the most important services per feature on the list;
 Make a separate list of connectivity elements (corridors and/ or bottlenecks)
in the landscape and briefly describe them (e.g. hydro-electric dam causing a
blockage to fish migration, network of green areas as stepping stones for
urban species)
Make a rapid description of each mapped feature on the landscape feature valuation
form Annex 2 by assessing:

the biodiversity value (nil, low, moderate, high, very high);

the economic value (nil, low, moderate, high, very high);

the social value (nil, low, moderate, high, very high);

the types of ecosystem services it provides (e.g. water regulation, food
production, aesthetic value etc.). See Annex X for examples and explanation, or
ask the trainer;

the connectivity aspects of the landscape (corridors and/ or bottlenecks).
Expected result: A list of mapped features and a rapid assessment of their
biodiversity, economic and social values described using the landscape feature
valuation form; a list of connectivity elements with a short description.
Assignment 3 – identifying GI projects
 Identify possible projects for: utilising/ improving/ restoring existing (or
potential) ES; or for solutions to the connectivity bottlenecks. The projects
should be related to some (or all) of the above listed ES and bottlenecks.
 Possible table to present the results of the group work (metaplan):
Identified ES/
bottlenecks
Brief description
Possible GI project
Expected result: An elaborated list of possible GI projects based on the landscape
analysis undertaken above and the benefits (e.g. ecosystem services provided,
connectivity elements preserved / restored) these will deliver in return.
Exercise 2: Re-designing the landscape II. - How to implement?
Objective: Objective of this exercise is to learn how to prioritise between different
GI projects based on the benefits which can be gained in return (these can be based
on the ecosystem services, on biodiversity benefits, connectivity, etc.); and to analyse
the key factors for successful implementation of GI projects (key partners/
stakeholders and appropriate funding sources).
Method: Prioritising and delivery
Time allocation (assignments 1 and 2): 30 min
Assignment 1 – Prioritising the possible GI projects
 Continue working in the same groups of five to six. Groups should prioritise
the GI projects they have identified above based on: benefits they will provide;
ecological imperatives; financial issues; likely political constraints;
 The selection process can be done through an open discussion or in a more
structured way. For example: each member of the group has a number of
votes (e.g. 3 or 5) which she / he can distribute at free will (e.g. 1 vote to 5
projects; 5 votes to 1 project; or 1, 2, and 3 votes to 3 projects);
 In the end the groups should have discussed and agreed their top three
solutions.
Assignment 2 – Implementing priority projects
 Think of the best ways to implement the 3 priority projects selected above;
 Through discussion decide who/which key stakeholders should be involved in
implementation of the specific solutions? Not a broad stakeholder analysis;
this should be a consideration of the specific individuals/ organisations which
have to be directly involved for the successful delivery of the selected GI
projects;
 Consider the best approach to get the selected GI projects implemented. You
should think about the key issues such as: level of involvement of individuals
and organisations identified above (i.e. partner, consulted, informed); what
would be suitable sources of finance; public/ voluntary involvement; etc.
 Possible table to present the results of the group work (metaplan):
GI project
Key stakeholders
Level of
involvement
Sources of funding
Assignment 3 – Present the results of the group work and moderated
plenary session
Time allocation: 10 min per group max
 Each group has 10 minutes to present the results of their work. Questions will
be allowed at the end of each presentation from the other delegates/ facilitator;
 At the end of the final presentation there will be time allocated for a general
discussion;
 The flipchart should be used by the moderator to record the key points
emerging from the discussion.
Exercise 3: Redesigning the landscape III: How to reconcile?
Objective: The objective of this exercise is to enable various stakeholders to
understand opposing points of view in order to better be able to resolve conflicts of
interest which often arise around conservation projects. The exercise should enable
both conservationists and local inhabitants to see the other point of view and
understand the values and logic behind it and acknowledge its equal importance and
validity.
Method: Role-play activity: Protected areas – how to understand all sides
Time allocation: 60 min
All participants read the background information and try to think whether they have
heard of similar situations in their neighbourhood. The facilitator gives each
participant a strip of paper with the description of their role. Everyone reads out their
role out loud in order for everyone to gain an understanding of what the sides to the
conflict are. Then participants get 10-15 minutes to prepare their arguments, think
about how best to defend their position during the debate. Afterwards all participants
discuss for 30 minutes the future of area XXX. The final decision is made by the
Minister for Environment and the Local Authorities. As the EU participatory
regulations require consent from the local population, without the consent of the Local
Authorities the Minister cannot enlarge the park.
Following the discussion the facilitator moderates a 15 minute long conversation on
what are the needs of people and nature, how they clash and are interconnected, can
such clashes be minimised and what is the right balance. A discussion on sustainable
tourism may follow.
Actors:
1. Local authorities of XYZ village
2. Conservationists/Environmental NGO representatives
3. Investors and businessmen
4. Local inhabitants:

Room and hotel owners

Unemployed

Foresters

Pensioners (berry gatherers)
5. Ministry of the Environment
Background information about the role-play situation:
Village XYZ is located in a pristine natural area. Some tourists visit the village already,
however, the area is not very well known for its natural value. Ministry for the
environment together with nature conservationists and environmental NGOs have
proposed to create a protected area in order to better preserve the natural heritage as
well as giving local nature better marketing. However, not all stakeholders are in
favour of this idea. Thus a debate goes on regarding whether or not XXX national park
should be created. Participants are assigned roles which they must represent during
the discussion. Participants must remember to speak in the name of the person whose
role they were assigned even if personally they disagree. They are strongly encouraged
to make up their own stories, add and improvise.
Positions:
1. Local authority:
You are the mayor of XYZ village. You are afraid that creating a national park will block
investment (e.g. building of new hotels, ski resorts etc.) in the region. You want that
people in your municipality live better: that they have well paid jobs and the region
becomes more prosperous. You make decisions according to the will of the
inhabitants (or the loudest group among them) – as they will decide whether you
stay for another term and you will keep this prestigious and well paid job for
next year. You think that nature conservation could be the solution, and nature could
be the brand of the village, however, it is risky and there are equally many arguments
that economic investment is the way forward.
2. Environmentalist:
You are an activist in an NGO, whose aim is nature protection. Widespread
environmental degradation scares you – you would like to preserve and protect area
XXX – this unique and beautiful ecosystem from urbanisation, mass tourism and
investment detrimental to the environment. Your job is your mission, you are
convinced that you are right. You want to protect area XXX for future
generations. Creating a national park could ensure appropriate protection and could
create space for saving vulnerable species such as lynxes, wolves or bears.
3. Investor:
You are an investor, who wants to build a ski and hotel complex near area XXX. You
promise to give jobs to a few hundred people, you also convince people that skiers
using your resort will use other local services (rooms, hotels, restaurants) thus
spending leaving money in the region for the local inhabitants. In reality you are only
interested in your personal profits, you want to make as much money as
possible, pay as little salaries as possible and host all tourists in your own hotels.
4. Room renter:
You are a local inhabitant. In your house you have a few rooms that you rent out to
tourists. Creating a National Park might be good for you as it might make the
area more attractive for tourists who could stay in your rooms. However, no one
can guarantee that this will actually happen.
5. Unemployed:
You are a local inhabitant – an unemployed person. You believe that in the region it is
very difficult to find a job and existing offers pay too little money. You think that more
economic development and/or tourism could be a chance for people in a
situation similar to yours.
6. Pensioner:
You are an elderly person, inhabitant of XYZ village. You have a low pension, you get
extra money by gathering berries. There are already rules regarding not being able to
gather in nature reserves and you risk paying a high fine by gathering berries there.
And now the plan is to make a National Park and take more areas away from the local
people. The park is a bane for you and restricts your freedom of movement and using
resources that used to belong to your ancestors. You are a fierce and diehard
opponent of the park.
7. Forester:
You are a forester in XXX forest district. You wish to sustainably exploit the forest, as
it generates large financial benefits. Salaries in forestry are higher than other
sectors. If a park is created you might be able to work for the park instead, however,
the salaries there are much lower and you do not believe in strict conservation. You
believe that in order to maintain high biodiversity levels, one needs to
actively manage the forest.
8. Minister for Environment:
You are the Minister for Environment. Your legal obligation is nature
protection. For a few years now in Poland no new national park has been created,
and none have been enlarged despite the fact that according to the 2020 Conception
of Spatial Planning for Poland, 3 new national parks should be created and several
existing ones enlarged. You would like to enlarge the national park, but you
care that all stakeholders are satisfied. You do not wish to antagonise your
constituency who can turn their backs on you and your party during the next
elections if things do not happen as they wish.
Questions for the moderated conversation afterwards:
The needs of nature versus the needs of humans:

Deep ecology claims that the life of one creature is always more valuable than
lower need of other creatures.

Do we live according to deep ecology?

Is living according to deep ecology possible in today’s world?

If animals die in collisions with cars, does it mean that we are not allowed to
use cars as long as we do not need this for survival.
Where is the right balance?
Nature’s needs:

National park, reserve, buffer zone

Small tourist pressure

No new large investment
Human needs:

Trails

Hotels, shelters

Roads, easy access, public transport

Ski resorts, pistes
How can we decrease the impact that tourism has on nature:

By changing our behaviour (being quiet, not walking off the designated paths)

Through technology (having biological sewage treatment plants, solar
batteries)

Landscape feature
Annex X. Landscape feature valuation form to guide decisions
The purpose of the table is to help you as a group to carry out a rapid assessment of
your landscape in terms of social, economic and natural benefits and ecosystem
services, based on your pooled best judgement. First, write all your landscape features
in the first row. Then, fill in the numbers (0 to 4) corresponding to the values in the
cells for each landscape feature / benefit combination. Most valuations will be quite
straightforward, and you shouldn’t need to discuss them at length (e.g. Old growth
forest has very high (4) biodiversity value, “arable field – intensive use” has high (3)
economic value and low (1) biodiversity value).

Value
Biodiversity
value
Economic
value
Social value
ES –
provisioning
– food
ES –
provisioning
– fuel / fibre
ES –
regulating –
carbon
sequestratio
n
ES –
regulating –
clean water
ES –
regulation –
flood control
ES – support
– nutrient
cycling
ES – cultural
– recreation
*Valuation: 0 = nil; 1 = low; 2 = moderate; 3 = high; 4 = very high
Annex x Examples of possible landscape elements in different landscape types
 In a small rural village

A.1. Arable Wheat, Maize or
Potato fields in intensive use

B.8. Deciduous or broadleaved
forest plantation

B.9. Golf course
B.10. Unpaved country roads

A.2. Arable Rye or Flax fields in
extensive use


A.3. Old growth forest –
protected, at least two separate
areas
 In a developed coastal area

C.1. Coastal lagoon

A.4. Historic village centre

C.2. Salt marsh

A.5. Modern housing estate,
houses with gardens

C.3. Sandy beach

C.4. Cliffs
A.6. Small river valley with a
stream and semi-natural hay
fields

C.5. Coastal grazed meadows

C.6. Olive groves

A.7. Regional road with natural
verges

C.7. Docks


C.8. Container terminal
A.8. Bridge over the stream


C.9. Coastal dunes
A.9. Hedgerows


C.10. Old vineyards
A.10. Active
quarry

or
abandoned
 In a more natural rural
area
 In a large urban area

D.1. Train station

D.2. Brownfields

D.3. Urban park

B.1. Calcareous grasslands

D.4. High rise buildings

B.2. Scrubs


B.3. Stone walls
D.5. Densely built up urban
centre

B.4. Hay meadows

D.6. Tree-lined roads

B.5. Stream and damp meadows

D.7. Industrial Estate

B.6. Broadleaved or mixed forest

D.8. Historic centre

B.7. Mediaeval castle ruins

D.9. Arable fields

D.10. Allotment
Annex X – Summary ecosystem services overview
General description of some ecosystem services
Farmland
Urban ecosystems
provisioning: crops, livestock, energy
provisioning: food from allotments and
gardens, water supply
cultural: recreation, landscape,
cultural heritage
Biodiversity / regulating: carbon
storage, flood management,
pollination, improving water, soil
quality, air quality
biodiversity / cultural: recreation,
landscape and cultural heritage
Coastal areas
regulating: cooling, noise reduction,
flood management, pollination,
improving water quality, improving air
quality
provisioning: fish
Uplands and grasslands
biodiversity / cultural: recreation,
landscape and cultural heritage
regulating: carbon storage, flood
management, improving water quality,
improving air quality
provisioning: energy (wind power),
water supply
cultural: recreation, landscape and
cultural heritage
regulating: carbon storage, flood
management, pollination, improving
water and soil quality
Fresh water
Woodlands
provisioning: water, fish
provisioning: timber, water supply
cultural: recreation, landscape,
cultural heritage
cultural: recreation, landscape and
cultural heritage
regulating: flood management,
improving water quality
regulating: carbon storage, flood
management, noise reduction,
improving water, soil and air quality
The Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES):
http://cices.eu/
Picture sources:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/index_en.htm
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/index_en.htm
http://www.mzp.cz/www/dav.nsf/rocenka_06/b5.htm
http://www.ramsar.org/cda/en/ramsar-news-archives-2007-transboundary-ramsar17220/main/ramsar/1-26-45-48%5E17220_4000_0__
http://www.danubeparks.org/blogs/danube_education/352/
http://www.extension.org/pages/62456/green-roofs-as-water-wise-landscapes
http://www.nestle.com/csv/case-studies/AllCaseStudies/watershed-biodiversity
http://www.dezeen.com/tag/green-walls/
http://www.linz09.at/en/pressefotos/download/2057918.html
http://www.vogelwarte.ch/scoring-with-biodiversity-farmers-enrich-nature.html
http://newsdesk.si.edu/photos/smithsonian-environmental-research-center
http://www.klamathwaterquality.com/images/fish_ladder.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_toad#mediaviewer/File:Toad_tunnel.jpg
http://www.greenrooftechnology.com/green-bridges
http://kansas.sierraclub.org/kansas-chapter-conservation-conference-july-19/
http://www.e-izolacje.pl/a/10840,warstwy-dachu-zielonego-sopranature/0/7,gotowy-dach-zielony
http://e-czytelnia.abrys.pl/index.php?mod=tekst&id=16598
http://www.stylus.com/xhbgtg
http://www.priva.ca/en/solutions-products/horticulture/water-management/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate#mediaviewer/File:MonthlyMeanT.gif
http://bandh-airconditioning.co.uk/
http://aia-arizona.org/business-center/employment-opportunities/
http://www.iliketurkey.com/birdwatching_e.htm
https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140614000722-234910581-power-of-resilience
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_fragmentation#mediaviewer/File:Amazonie_deforestation.jpg
http://www.fauna-flora.org/species/iberian-lynx/
This brochure is generously supported by the European Commission, but does not
necessarily reflect its views and opinions.