National Experiences with Biodiversity Indicators

1. National Agency of Environment Forest Monitoring Department West Balkans regional EEA/Eionet cooperationCapacity Building Workshop on Biodiversity indicators4-6 November 2013, Dubrovnik Croatia National Experiences with Biodiversity Indicators

2. Introduction • Monitoring of indicators in protected areas in Albania is finally based on Decision No. 1098 of the Minister Council. • According to this decision, the indicators are divided in 3 groups as following: • A - Environmental Indicators of Quality (EIQ), • B - Environmental Indicators of Impact (EII), • C - Environmental Indicators of Pressure (EIP) • Indicators in protected areas are grouped in the first category (EIQ), in the 5-th class and named as: “diversity of ecosystems and habitats in the protected zones” • NRC Biodiversity and institutions at the region level are responsible for the monitoring of the indicators in the category EIQ.

4. Actual situation • Albania has made a good progress last years, on the increment and enlargement of the protected area network. Actually, 18% of total area of the country is designated as protected zone in different level, according to the IUNC categories. • The national parks dominant more than 52% of protected area, followed by the other category “Protected Landscape” with 32%, and the other part are different categories. • The increment and enlargement of protected zones are accompanied in the most of the cases with a management plan, when are determinate zoning of parks and through this action we have data for the value of biodiversity in each zone • This process is still going on, and actually we have the first results for two national parks (National Park of Dajti and Prespa). In the end of this year, waiting to finish the management plan for five other protected zones, when two of them are inter-regional cooperation between Albania, Monte Negro, Greece, Kosovo and Macedonia. (Bjeshket e Nemuna dhe ShebenikJabllanice) .

5. Biodiversity and Monitoring Plan in country range. • A monitoring system is composed of monitoring stations belonging to monitoring networks specifically established for each environmental compartment i.e. in the case of the Project, air, water (surface and groundwater), biodiversity and soil. • Each network of the proposed national integrated environmental monitoring system (NIEMS) comprises monitoring stations and sites distributed all over the country. • The aim of the process presented in the present document was to review the networks, stations and indicators verifying their representativeness and relevance. • Considering the extent of this ambitious System and the scarcity of human, technical and financial resources for implementing it, CEMSA, in agreement with the MoEFWA and the NEA, the monitoring networks for air, water, biodiversity and soil have been re-evaluated. • The process was done in order to set up a cost-effective and realistic environmental monitoring system taking into account the actual capacities and resources in the country. • The activity was based on the national integrated environmental monitoring system (NIEMS) proposed by the EU StEMA project.

6. Biodiversity and Monitoring Plan in country range. Prioritisation • Give a scale of priority for each station inside its network, in order to make the monitoring system flexible in terms of timeline implementation and budget availability. • Three levels of priorities have been defined, from priority 1 or H (high), including the stations to be monitored immediately, to priority 3 or L (low) stations which could be monitored at a latter stage (10 year target). • The prioritisation gives flexibility to the implementation of the IEMS in terms of programme and budgeting and gives the base for a timeline implementation of the whole system. • In total there are 76 biodiversity indicators, when 50 of them are in the first priority, 17 there are in the second priority and the other in the third.

13. Conclusions • Financial opportunities are not in proper condition to complete an authentic database on biodiversity, however relying on something priorities can be achieved. • Efforts to build a unique database can be considered by CEMSA failed, and as a result another project will be needed in the future. • Legal instruments and agreements between institutions that possess data on biodiversity, should become active, through laws. • Currently being prepared to be driven national forest inventory which will attempt to guide a series of problems on biodiversity and the current situation. • THANK YOU!