AIN!24 Tho feprmts WOMC/6

Okt dn hy al of. My Putte raven Choe Yheeee 4 eae ae Pra gnepes teva,
oud Ie Pras Pere tease ) bob. Keas Cantets . Mire p Thee pa,
Des hb's Ws Hen aru detab etereeek , AaMorlorrele,

Towards an assessment of
Trans-European Transport Networks’ impact
on nature conservation

Olivia Bina(1) Bamaby Briggs(1) and Gillian Bunting(2)
(1) RSPB/BirdLife International, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SG19 2DL, UK
Fax no. 00 44 1767 691178 e-mail olivia.bina@rspb.org.uk

(2) World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 219c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3
ODL, UK Faxno. 00 44 1223 277 136

Key words: infrastructure, nature conservation, strategic, assessment, methodology
Abstract

The potential impacts on nature conservation of major transport infrastructure plans for the European
Union (the Trans-European Transport Networks - TENs) are examined. A methodology for a
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is proposed and parts of it were tested on the TENs
using Geographical Information System to combine road and railway networks with environmental
data for the European Union. Corridors were added either side of the planned routes and the number
and surface area of sites falling within two corridors of 2 and 10 km was calculated. The centre points
of 21% of Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and 11% of the total surface area of Nationally Designated
Sites (NDSs) were found within 10 km of planned roads or railways, and 4% of all IBAs and 2% of all
NDSs were found within 2 km. Two case studies confirm the potential for damage. The results
Stress the need for a strategic assessment of the cumulative impacts of TENs on nature conservation
at the earliest planning stages.

INTRODUCTION

A pilot study produced by BirdLife International and the World Conservation Monitoring
Centre ‘The impact of Trans-European Networks on nature conservation’ (1995) argues
that European distribution of important habitat and species should be taken into account
when planning major infrastructure development, and that the European Union (EU) has
failed to do this when planning Trans-European Networks (TENs). It proceeds to
suggest that a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the TENs as a whole is
essential to ensure that the commitments to the United Nations Convention on Biological
Diversity and to the creation of a Natura 2000 Network established in the Habitats
Directive (92/43/EEC, EC 1992c) are to be integrated in transport policy and
programmes in Europe.

An attempt is made to quantify the potential impact on habitats and species in protected
areas, and contribute to develop an SEA methodology for TENs, based on a network-
levei analysis using Geographical Information Systems (GIS), and supported by detailed
case studies.

THE PROBLEM

In July 1996 the European Parliament and the Council approved a Decision (No
1692/96/EC, EC 1996) defining guidelines for the TENs. The networks involve a
combination of construction and upgrading of approximately 140 road schemes
(including ca 15000 kilometres of new motorways), 11 rail links, 57 combined transport
projects, and 26 inland waterway links throughout EU member states.

In theory, the EU’s legal and political framework should ensure that TENs planning is
fully compatible with the need to protect and enhance the EU environment. There are a
series of policy statements (EC 1992a, EC 1992b, EC 1993a), recognising the wide-
ranging nature of the environmental impacts of transport, and promoting the
fundamental principle of integration of ‘environmental protection requirements into the
definition and implementation of Community policies’ (Article 130r(2) of the Maastricht
Treaty for the European Union).

However, the planning process which has produced the final guidelines for the TENs has
failed to integrate environmental protection, and there is no evidence that TENs will
contribute to Community environmental objectives, as required in Article 2 of the
Guidelines (EC 1996). On the contrary, it appears that proposed TENSs will cause
serious damage to habitats and species throughout the EU, threatening the Natura 2000
network based on the Habitats Directive (EC 1992c). Special Protection Areas (SPAs),
one element of Natura 2000 , are already being damaged by transport infrastructure
(Table1).

Table 1 Special Protection Areas being damaged by transport infrastructure

H i Cause of damage
} A shallow sea area and adjacent coast with dry and wet grassland, i Construction of a
? marshes, lake and reed-swamp, important for breeding waders, terns, i highway/railway

Italy

:_ Cagliari i_for breeding waders, gulls, terns, gallinules, egrets :_ channel

Spain i Pozo Negro : Montane area with scrub, grasslands and woods with a rich forest-bird : Road construction

(Source: McNiven 1994)

Linear infrastructure is likely to cause significant habitat fragmentation in those regions of
the EU where habitats are already being reduced in size as a result of development
pressure. Some of the key natural and semi-natural forest habitats offer a very good
example of the significant loss which TENs could cause through fragmentation. It is
worth highlighting the spatial relationship between areas where planned TENs (roads
and railways) are particularly numerous and selected categories of forest type, which
would be threatened by further transport infrastructure development (Table 2).

Table 2 Examples of forest types in Europe which would be threatened by further
transport infrastructure development

Habitat typ H Vegetation zone and extent

: Iberian peninsula - in Portugal major roads are planned throughout the whole country _

onneneecesencceaanasenscasecnnsccnscsacnedessncnsnedscnedgudabedsdésddddsddduddseMecsccsavasdsssudddccessdedudddsddddcddcdscecsssddecedddsdisadddddcccccadsddsddsdvcsecedssdddddcsdeceddsdcdecsdsaascddeseccausdadsdddadcaacessdcaseda:

Cork oak wood (montado) i This habitat has been decreasing steadily throughout Europe and Portugal is the only country
E in the EU to contain large areas of montado (evergreen holm and cork oak wood, including
? Quercus suber and Quercus rotundifolia). |mportant animal species, such as the threatened

Sub-montane acidophilous

: 90% of this vegetation Zone is found in the Federal Republic of Germany. Only small reserves
: still exist.

Acidophilous oakwoods and % of this vegetation zone is found in the Federal Republic of Germany. Areas of semi-
oak-beech woods with birch : natural woodlands larger than SO ha have already disappeared, so completion of the bio-
?_genetic network in this Zone po

problems.

Strategic Environmental Assessment is widely regarded as an important tool for the
promotion of environmental integration in EU plans, programmes and policies (eg. EC
1992a, EC 1993c, EC 1994) and the European Commission (EC) has recently, 4
December 1996, adopted a proposal for a Directive on SEA. It is generally understood
that, in order to be effective, SEA should be conducted at the earliest stages of planning
in order to enable its findings to influence plans and inform decision makers.

Despite this, a decision to approve the Guidelines was taken by the European
Parliament and Council without the support of an environmental assessment. Indeed,
the Decision commits EU institutions to the future development of ‘appropriate methods of
analysis’ (Article 8) of the Guidelines’ environmental impacts. This is a disappointingly weak
statement which ignores the fact that such method and analysis should have been
completed before approving the Giodelines, and reflects the strong disagreement
between the EP and Council.

Thus, the degree of environmental protection resulting from the Guidelines will depend heavily
on the interpretation of the following parts:

The objectives of the TENs, presented in Article 2, make an important link to the
Community's environmental objectives, in line with Article 130r of the Maastricht Treaty
(see above), stating ‘The network must: (a) ensure the sustainable mobility of
persons and goods... while helping to achieve the Community's objectives,
particularly in regard to the environment...’

Article 8 on environmental protection makes a direct reference to the Habitats Directive
(Article 6.3, 92/43/EEC), which clearly calls for an environmental assessment of plans
likely to have a significant effect on Special Conservation Areas (SACs) ‘Any plan or
project not directly connected with, or necessary to the management of the site but
likely to have a significant effect there on, either individually or in combination with
other plans or projects, Shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications
for the site, in view of the site's conservation objectives...’

Finally, Article 8 of the Guidelines supports the need for Strategic Environmental
Assessment, calling upon the Commission to develop appropriate methods of analysis.

The authors argue that interpretation of the Guidelines should lead to an SEA of the -
TENs as a whole, in order to ensure the respect of EU’s commitments to the UN
Convention on Biological Diversity and to the creation of a Natura 2000 Network
established in the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC).

No SEA of TENSs has yet been started and the European Commission's Directorate
General for Transport (DGVII) is still in the process of defining an adequate SEA
methodology for TENs. The study described here is part of a series of actions by
BirdLife International, intended to press for an immediate assessment which should
influence the review of the TENs in 1999, as stated in Article 21 of the Guidelines.

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - STEPS TOWARDS A
METHODOLOGY

A set of eight essential steps are suggested for an SEA of TENs, and developed in order
to predict the potential impact of TENs on nature conservation. In this paper we explore
steps 3,4 and 6 (in italics).

Step 1 Determine the need for an SEA

Step 2 [Establish a work programme

Step 3 Identify key and intermediate objectives (Plan or Programme)

Step 4 Define the scope of SEA:
Characteristics of TENs, baseline situation, relevant impact indicators, impact
prediction techniques, alternatives, consultation.

Step 5 Set up an environmental database

Step 6 Environmental analysis:
Impact prediction, significance of impacts, mitigation measures, sensitivity
analysis

Step 7 Propose recommendations and prepare a SEA report

Step 8 Monitoring and feedback

Step 3 Objectives

An objectives-led approach is suggested, where the main objectives of TENs are
identified and alternative strategies are assessed against their ability to achieve these
objectives. The Guidelines for TENs (EC 1996) include eight objectives which fall
broadly into four assessment categories shown in the diagram below. SEA should focus
on the first of these eight objectives, bearing in mind the remaining seven objectives and
the potential conflict between them. In order to be successful, SEA should identify a
strategy for TENs which reaches a balance between the different and conflicting
interests.

Figure 1 An objective-led approach for the SEA of TENs

STRATEGIC EVIRONMENTAL ASS’T

ARTICLE 2
FIRST PARAGRAPH
‘ensure the sustainable
mobility of persons and
goods... helping to achieve
the Community’s
objectives, particularly in
regard to the environment’

INTERMEDIATE OBJECTIVES
Based on Community’s environmental objectives:

To minimise emissions of traffic related pollutants
to the atmosphere (CO2, CO; NO, and VOCs)-
Green Paper

e¢ To minimise noise pollution-Green Paper

e To minimise consumption of non-renewable
resources-Green Paper

¢ To promote a shift towards environment-friendly
modes of transport-Green Paper

e To limit the physical impact of new roads-White P.
e To maintain or restore habitats and species of wild
fauna and flora at favourable conservation status-
Habitats Directive.

OTHER APPRAISAL FRAMEWORKS

In order to translate the environmental objective of TENs into tangible criteria, the study
identifies a set of intermediate objectives and related indicators (see ‘Relevant impact
indicators’ below), based on Community policy documents and legislation. The Green
and White papers on transport (EC 1992a, EC 1993a), the Fifth Environmental Action
Programme (EC 1992b), and the Habitats Directive (EC 1992c) were used to provide six
intermediate objectives (see diagram above), although these are not intended to be
exhaustive.

Step 4 Scoping Exercise

The scoping exercise identifies the types of impact associated with proposed TENs and
selects suitable methods for their assessment (steps 4 and 5). Given the geographical
scale of TENs it is necessary to find a balance between levels of detail and feasibility
within the time constraints and the urgency of carrying out an SEA of the network.
Although TENs and EU-wide baseline environmental data is incomplete, leaving a
certain degree of uncertainty over impacts, the results from initial assessment will enable

to identify areas of potential conflict with objectives for the environment and sustainable
mobility.

Data on TENs

The Commission’s Database Management, Publications and GIS Unit (GISCO) provided

a dataset of digitised maps for each transport mode. The study limited its analysis to

road and rail networks. GISCO data on these modes falls in two categories:

1. existing segments - on which no further data collection needs to be done

2. planned segments - which does not distinguish between new motorways/railways to
be built, and existing roads/railways to be upgraded. Further work should be done in
order to identify such differences.

The inability to locate new infrastructure on the digitised maps has important implications
for the degree of accuracy of the analysis. The type of impact on the environment can
vary considerably according to whether infrastructure development is new or upgraded.
The study accepts that this, together with the fact tnat transport corridors are constantly
changing as a result of Member States constant review of their plans, is an unavoidable

uncertainty because of the strategic level of the assessment of plans and programmes
as opposed to single project Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs).

Baseline data and the reason for focusing on Important Bird Areas

The decision to base the environmental analysis of SEA on GIS required that baseline
data should be available in a digitised form. After identifying an ideal list of basic
topographical data and environmental information, the study identified the significant
limitations of this approach as a result of the lack or incomplete character of existing
datasets. This is particularly true for environmental data, which is often not available for
all EU countries and tends to vary significantly in terms of quality, as different institutes in
different countries have varying standards. The experience of CORINE Information
System has been a clear example of such problems.

Data on habitats of particular conservation value and listed in the Habitats Directive is
incomplete and varying in quality. The only complete datasets which were found readily
available were those on wetland areas and forest coverage (from World Conservation
Monitoring Centre, WCMC, Cambridge, Uk), and the information in the CORINE
Biotopes dataset. Given the limited time and resources available for this pilot study, it
was decided that the analysis would focus on a selection of two categories of important
nature conservation sites. The focus on sites had the advantage of combining
information on habitats and species, thus giving a broad picture of TENs implications for
biodiversity. The two sets of data chosen were: Important Bird Areas (IBAs, from
BirdLife International), and Nationally Designated Sites (NDS, from WCMC).

IBAs are a network of sites which are, at a biogeographical scale, critical for the long-

_ term viability of naturally occurring bird populations across the ranges of those species
for which a site-based approach is appropriate. IBAs are the basis for the selection of
Special Protection Areas under the Wild Birds Directive 79/409/EEC (EC 1979). IBA
data was compiled in 1989 by BirdLife International (Grimmet and Jones 1989), and is
currently being updated. These sites are particularly useful for this assessment since
birds can be a good indicator of environmental damage, and data on bird population
trends is better than most taxa, with priority species clearly identified (Tucker and Heath
1994). A separate dataset was available for IBAs in France from the Ligue pour la
Protection des Oiseaux (LPO) and Sécrétariat pour la Faune et la Flore (SFF): the only
country which has mapped all IBA boundaries on computer (so called polygon
boundaries).

Data on Nationally Designated Sites includes sites which have been legally designated
for conservation of nature by the national governments (eg Areas of Outstanding Natural
Beauty and National Parks in the UK). The data is presented as point co-ordinates and
WCMC'’s protected areas database gives the related surface area.

Impact Indicators

Impact indicators were based on general principles and past experience, including
adaptation of the content and level of information of impact identification lists for project
EIAs. The study makes an initial attempt to list those key indicators which should be
included in an SEA of TENs, in order to quantify their potential implications for the
conservation of habitats and species in the EU. The real challenge of an SEA is to
select the most significant impact indicators which are meaningful for the level of

decision-making involved. Their scale must be appropriate to strategic planning. Thus,
in this context indicators are necessarily broad brush, and are divided in two main
categories: global and spatial.

Global impact indicators

These are not necessarily linked to a spatial dimension, and tend to refer to changes in
the quality of the environment and tend to have economic implications (eg traffic and
time wasted on congested routes).

They should cover: 1) Air pollution (CO2, CO, NO,, VOCs), 2) Energy efficiency, 3)
Energy consumption, 4) Non-renewable energy consumption, 5) Aggregate
consumption (construction and maintenance phase), 6) Oil pollution (tonnage of oil
released from marine transport), 7) Traffic, 8) Safety. (NB The environmental analysis in
the pilot project did not include global impacts).

Spatial impact indicators

These impacts have a distinctive spatial dimension affecting the natural, physical and
cultural environment. Their choice was dictated by the need to clarify the fact that
transport’s impact goes well beyond air and noise pollution: two of the most commonly
recognised externalities of the transport sector.

Spatial impacts include: 1) Landtake affecting protected areas, 2) Landtake affecting
other landcover categories, 3) Changes in landuse as a result of transport infrastructure,
4) Secondary development, 5) Ecological impact, 6) Hydrological impact, 7) Geology
and geomorphological impacts, 8) Noise pollution, 9) Culture and archaeology, 10)
Social impacts.

Prediction techniques for spatial impacts

The size, nature and scale of TENs suggested the use of Geographical Information
System (GIS). GiS is an analytical tool which allows a vast amount of complex
interactions to be examined, based on data on soil erosion, pollution, nature
conservation and land use policies over large areas.

The project makes suggestions for impact prediction techniques for landtake and

ecological indicators based on the creation of buffer zones. These involve the definition

of a buffer along a route, or around an area of specific interest, making the assumption

that impacts within the buffers will affect nature conservation. Essentially, this is

intended as the first step in constraint mapping, identifying areas where transport
infrastructure would have significant negative impacts in terms of water management,

- species and habitats, tourism etc.).

Two buffers were developed along transport routes for roads and railways. The choice

of buffer size was dictated primarily by three uncertainties:

1. whether a particular segment of TENs falls into the category of new or simply
upgraded infrastructure

2. the varying degree of accuracy in the location of new infrastructure

3. the need to assume a wide range of impacts with significant variations in the range of
their physical impact (eg vibration and noise compared with secondary landtake and
hydrological impacts which can have an effect some distance from the development).

The first buffer is a ten-kilometre corridor on either side of the road or railway line. Any
nature conservation site within this range is considered potentially at risk. The second
buffer is a two-kilometre corridor considered particularly useful for further analysis on the
impact of fragmentation on species and habitats and rural areas. However, to be valid,
the analysis would have to be based on the exact and definitive routes which existing
GISCO digitised data from does not offer.

Corridor analysis within ten kilometres on both sides of the route is unlikely to capture
spatial impacts on complex ecosystems and physical processes, particularly in wetland
habitats. The EC should ensure that more sophisticated computer modelling is
developed to describe dynamic processes acting over large areas (EN 1994).

Alternatives

SEA should be carried out on a range of alternative strategies. Identification of
alternatives should focus on achieving the key objectives of TENSs, as listed in Article 2 of
the Guidelines. These should not be limited to the transport modes but should include
alternatives to construction such as speed limits, traffic-calming measures, road pricing,
fuel taxation, public transport subsidies etc. Priorities between (often conflicting)
objectives and the subsequent choice of alternatives to reach these objectives, should
not be left to ‘assessment tools’ like SEA. This is ultimately the responsibility of decision-
makers. For this reason SEA should present and analyse separately all alternatives.

Step 6 Environmental analysis

Given the nature of SEA and the geographical scale of TENs, it should be stressed that
the results of Step 6, the environmental analysis of the networks, can only be expected
to give a range of the relative impact of different alternative strategies compared in the
assessment. The environmental analysis should help decision makers to identify the
alternative strategy which will have the least negative impact on the environment and
which offers the best way of meeting all the key objectives of TENs.

GIS was used to combine road and railway TENs with topographical and environmental
data for the EU. Buffers were added along either side of the planned road and railway
segments. Computer modelling was used to calculate the number, and estimate the
surface area, of nature conservation sites found within the two corridors. Three different
sets of data for protected areas were used:

A. Important Bird Areas (IBAs) defined by point co-ordinates for all EU12
B. Important Bird Areas (IBAs) defined through digitised boundaries for France
C. Nationally Designated Sites (NDS) defined by point co-ordinates for all EU12.

An attempt was made to present the magnitude or physical extent of predicted impacts
in quantitative terms (Figure 2). Complex ecological impacts (eg. loss of biodiversity due
to reductions in the size of habitat units, to isolation or fragmentation) were not
assessed, although some consideration to these impacts was given, primarily in
qualitative terms, in the two case studies (Table 3). Given more time and funding, the
detail of the French data would have allowed the collection of further information on the
habitat fragmentation caused by TENs in France.

RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT OF TENs POTENTIAL IMPACTS

57 IBAs fall within 2km of planned roads and railways throughout the EU 12,
representing 3.8% of total EU IBAs, and 309 IBAs fall within 10km, representing 21%
(Figure 2, results for dataset A). These figures include only those IBAs with centre
points within 2 and 10km of the route. IBAs with centre points falling just outside these
corridors are not included. The percentages for France (Figure 2, results for dataset
B.2), where the availability of digitised boundaries enabled us to use surface area figures
(see map of France, below), are slightly higher: 4.1% of all French IBAs fall within 2km
buffer against 3.8% for IBAs in the EU.

Further analysis would be needed to establish whether more accurate data for EU
protected areas and IBAs (including digitised boundaries) would reveal even greater
threats to these sites, as suggested in the case of France.

In an attempt to bridge the gap, analysis of TENs (road corridors only) potential impact
on NDS in the EU12 was based on the expansion of site centre points according to their
surface area. The French results combined with the results of the analysis on NDS
suggest that the analysis on simple point co-ordinates underestimates the potential
damage.

Table 3 Summary of key results from two case studies

B) CASE STUDY APPROACH

@resund _‘ The case study shows an impact on SPAs and the weakness of the analysis of

road/rail ‘alternative strategies’ in EIAs. The Link will affect Saltholm, a large,
link uncultivated island with saltmarshes surrounded by shallow sea with mudflats,
important for breeding duck, cormorants, waders , terns, and for wintering

wildfowl.

Via The case study shows a potential impact on 9 IBAs, of which 2 qualify as
Egnatia SPAs, and 5 as Ramsar sites, and the limitations of the EIA process in Greece
Motorway (especially fragmentation of the scheme, weak consideration of alternatives
and summaries of EA Statements which are too generic to be of help for
decision making).
An example of the impacts: the approved route for the segment between
Nymphopetra and Analypsi, of the Via Egnatia, will affect Lakes Volvi and
Langada (IBA 022, also SPA and Ramsar site). It will pass through the
northern side of Lake Volvi, thus surrounding it completely with motorways,
and it will pass at a distance of 1-0.5 km west and north of Lake Langada,
affecting streams of great importance to the IBA (HOS 1994).

Figure 2 Results of the GIS analysis using three sets of data (A, B and C):

Results for dataset A.1

% of important Bird Areas (IBAs)
falling within 10 km of proposed
TENs in 12 EU countries
2 %near
16 %near planned

planned normal
roads railways

Ge
Ke %near

planned
high
speed
railways

Results for dataset B.1

% \mportant Bird Areas falling within
10 km of TENs in France

4% near
planned 5.8%near
roads aM planned
railways

a

Results for dataset C.1

Nationally Designated Sites falling
within 10 km of proposed TENs
(roads) in 12 EU countries

11% surface
area ofNDS
near planned
roads

Results for dataset A.2

% of Important Bird Areas (IBAs)
falling within 2 km of proposed TENs
axon In 12 BU countries
planned 0.5%near
roads planned
SS Mi normal
q railways
0.5% near
planned
high
speed
railways

Results for dataset B.2

% \mportant Bird Areas falling
within 2 km of TENs in France

2.6% near 15% near
planned planned

roads —~> railways
,

Results for dataset C.2

Nationally Designated Sites falling
within 2 km of proposed TENs
(roads) in 12 EU countries

2 %surface

area ofNDS
—>

near planned
roads

10

rie tails Culupean HOad and Kail Network and Important Bird Areas
in France

ap POPE gem ek

DN

aye

g = @ (ay
ie pee. re ree
5 a z

Abb tag sLItte..
Pada pIbPZba

Z anny : MpED consmesion Bindife

ig 34

Legend

Trans-European Road Network - EXISTING

NV Trans-European Rall Network - EXISTING
Hl Area within 2m of Trans-European Road Network - PLANNED
Hl Area within 2m of Trans-European Rail Network - PLANNED
£5) Area within 10km of Trans-European Road Network - PLANNED
Z Aree within 10km of Trans-European Rall Network - PLANNED
EA important Bird Areas (IBAs)

1 ies

1H urven Areas

Data Sources

IBA Information - LPO / SFF

The Trans European road and railway networks In this map
are based on digital Information from EUROSTAT/GISCO.This
digital The official

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

By covering the whole surface of the EU, the TENs present an interesting challenge for
the development of an SEA capable of taking a wide range of spatial impacts on nature
conservation into account.

We suggest an approach for further research and discussion which envisages a series

of increasingly detailed assessments:

e Anetwork-level assessment involving a broad prediction of conflicts between
environmental and other objectives, a prediction of potential impacts, and
consideration of strategic alternatives, including transport policy options such as
reducing demand for transport, and a greater share of transport by rail and sea.

e Aregional-level assessment (for example, the Iberian Peninsula, the Alpine arc etc.)
involving greater precision in the impact prediction methods and in the proposal of
alternatives. ;

e Acorridor analysis which could discuss in detail aspects such as ‘the best route
option’. i

A way forward in assessing potential landtake and ecological impacts of TENs could
involve the creation of a land cover map which identifies areas where new infrastructure
should not be built because of sensitivity for habitat and species listed in the Habitats
Directive 92/43/EEC (EC 1992c). This would go beyond the limits of protected areas.

The results of the pilot study confirm BirdLife International's experience that
infrastructure development can have serious impacts on habitats and species important
for conservation. A large number of sites important for biodiversity (including sites
protected under the Birds Directive, and the Habitats Directive) are close to planned
roads and railways across Europe. The statistical and visual information resulting from
the combination of SEA and GIS modelling has proved an important tool for impact
prediction and policy analysis of such a large-scale project.

Although the type of analysis undertaken by this pilot study only scratches the surface of
the problem, the initial results raise serious doubts as to whether TENs, as proposed in
the Guidelines in Article 2, could really contribute to the achievement of Community's
environmental objectives.

SEA can and should have a prominent role in planning and decision making, it can
explore the global implications of TENs for biodiversity conservation and raise important
questions on the choice of alternative transport modes. Its results should be considered
as much a constraint to infrastructure development as financial or social constraints.

12

REFERENCES

EC (1979) EU Council Directive on the conservation of wild birds 79/409/EEC. Brussels

EC (1992a) Green Paper on The Impact of Transport on the Environment A Community strategy for'
sustainable mobility’. COM(92) 46 fin.

EC (1992b) Towards Sustainability - A European Community Programme of Policy and Action in
relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development, March

EC (1992c) EU Council Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
92/43/EEC. Brussels

EC (1993a) The future development of the common transport policy - A global approach of a
Community framework for sustainable mobility. Bulletin of the EC Supplement 3/93. Drawn up
on the basis of COM(92) 494 final

EC (1993b) The European High Speed Train Network - Environmental Impact Assessment.
Executive summary, October

EC (1993c) Integrating the environment into other policy areas within the Commission.
Communication to the Commission from Mr Paleokrassas and Mr Van Miert adopted 16 June
1993

EC (1994) Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision on Community guidelines for
the development of the trans-European transport network. COM(94) 106 fin., 7.4.94, printed in
the OJ C220 vol.37, 8.8.94

EC (1996) Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on Community
Guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network. In the OJ L228
vol.39, 9.9.96

EN (1994) Nature conservation in Environmental Assessment. Report carried out by Environmental
Resources Management

ERM et al. (1994) Setting Forth: strategic assessment. Commissioned by the Scottish Office.
Summary report June

EUROSTAT (1994) Personal communication including descriptive information of digitised datasets

Grimmet RFA and Jones TA (1989) Important Bird Areas in Europe. BirdLife International
(previously |CBP) Technical publication no.9. Cambridge

HOS-Hellenic Omithological Society (1994) Preliminary report on impacts to Important Bird Areas
from Via Egnatia. Athens

McNiven D (1994) A review of the effectiveness of the European Council Directive 79/409/EEC on
the conservation of wild birds, February, RSPB, UK

RSPB (1994) Transport and Biodiversity: a discussion paper. Sandy

Tucker G M and Heath M F (1994) Birds in Europe: their conservation status. Cambridge UK:
BirdLife International

UN/ECE (1992) Application of Environmental Impact Assessment Principles to Policies, Plans and
Programmes. Environmental Series 5. New York

S:\WORK\OLIVIA\REP-TP\ABSTRACT.DOC

13

et, ly gel

wa

Sian He jee ett Sires SAM St, Tee seal us Rey capes at

‘ . ' sa
(ery § fa iy ia! Fi
'
pt. i
7 3 it 2
BAe OES , ,
. ie te oa
hy A _
wi &
if
Ee
’
ieee
rer
eat am
ate - ever
—' =f, »