Mapping Regional Vulnerability in the Southern Alps ... · PDF fileEvaluating Trends and...

Mapping Regional Vulnerability in the Southern Alps - Evaluating Trends and Developing Sustainable Adaptation

Strategies for the Verdon CatchmentMASSIF

A study envisaged to be a project by theEU in the Seventh Framework Programme

Participants of the Summer SchoolTutors: Eric Arets, Uta Fritsch (Chair),

Diana Reckien, Martin Wildenberg and Brooke Wilkerson

Fourth ALTER-Net Summer School

Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

5 – 17 September 2009 Peyresq, Alpes de Haute-Provence, France

The MASSIF Final Report

II


III

About this report - What it is, and what it isn't

The following report was prepared by the participants of the 2009 ALTER-Net SummerSchool "Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services", 5 - 17 September 2009, Peyresq, Alpes deHaute-Provence, France. It is the product of two intensive and inspired weeks of hard workwithin four working groups. This report is a product partly based on "real" data and "real"observations, and partly based on our imagination, as explained in the following.

The case study conducted by the four working groups "Mapping Regional Vulnerability in theSouthern Alps - Evaluating Trends and Developing Sustainable Adaptation Strategies for theVerdon Catchment (MASSIF)" concentrated on the neighbouring area i.e. the Verdon catch-ment. The working plan of the case study was formulated as if it were a project commissionedby the EU to get the participants closely confronted with reality (e.g. we provided an invented"Annex I - Description of Work"). The following sectors were studied: agriculture, nature con-servation and tourism. Additionally, a synthesis group was formed by four participants. A del-egate from each of the other three sectoral groups provided the synthesis group with sectoralinformation. The task of the synthesis group was to summarise the results of all groups, i.e. ofthe entire case study for policy makers. This year the tutors were attached to a specific group asin the former years namely: Synthesis: Brooke Wilkerson; Agriculture: Martin Wildenberg;Nature conservation: Eric Arets; Tourism: Diana Reckien. They acted as stakeholders againplay-acting a role (namely a sheep farmer, a representative of an environmental NGO, abuilder/planner of wellness and family tourism resorts, and finally an EU scientific officer).However, during the walk and on the excursion day participants met a few "real stakeholders"as well - so not all of their stakeholder interviews were role-play.

The groups presented their results in mid-term and at a final meeting on the last day. The finalversions of the four reports were submitted to the summer school secretariat after the summerschool by the groups, mostly with some additional refinements according to the obtained feed-back.

Due to its hybrid nature of "real and imaginary", this report is not a product meant to informreal decision making or other research directly. Nevertheless, the concepts used, the under-standing of the systems described, and the general conclusions drawn are well worth beingconsidered further.

Uta Fritsch

(Chair of the tutors)


IV


V

Content

About this report - What it is, and what it isn´t III

Part A MASSIF: Synthesis 1Executive Summary2Policy Recommendations3 A 1. Introduction 5A 1.1 The Verdon catchment 6A 1.2 Methodology 6A 1.3 Limitations 8A 2. Scenarios 8A 2.1 Global Orchestration scenario 9A 2.2 Adapting Mosaic scenario 10A 3. Results 10A 3.1 Current use of ecosystem services in the Verdon catchment 10A 3.2 Synergies and conflicts in current use of ecosystem services in the Verdon

catchment 13A 4. Future scenarios 13A 5. Recommendations and adaptation strategies 14A 6. References 15Appendix A 1. Definitions of ecosystem services 16Appendix A 2. Summary of interviews 17

Part B MASSIF: Agricultural Sector 19B 1. Introduction 21B 1.1 Objectives 21B 1.2 Methodology 21B 2. Results 22B 2.1 Current state 22B 2.2 Land use 22B 2.3 Ecosystem services, drivers and pressures 23B 2.4 Vulnerability assessment 23B 2.5 Applying future scenarios in the FCM model 26B 3. Policy recommendations 26B 3.1 Global Orchestration 26B 3.2 Adaptive Mosaic 27B 4. References 27Appendix B 1. Pie chart showing the agricultural land cover in the Verdon catchment 29Appendix B 2. Definitions of drivers and pressures 30Appendix B 3. Conceptual model for the Verdon catchment 31Appendix B 4. Table of weights in scenarios and adaptive capacity 33Appendix B 5. Valuation of adaptive capacity for the ecosystem services in the current situation and in the different scenarios. 35


VI

Part C MASSIF: Nature Conservation Sector 37C 1. The Verdon catchment and it's state concerning ecosystems and services 39C 2. Vulnerability assessment 40C 2.1 Climate change vulnerability assessment 40C 2.2 Land-use change vulnerability assessment 41C 3. Scenarios 42C 3.1 Global Orchestration scenario 42C 3.2 Adapting Mosaic scenario 43C 4. Recommendations 43C 5. References 44

Part D MASSIF: Tourism Sector 45Abstract 46D 1. Introduction 47D 2. Methods 47D 3. Results 48D 3.1 Development possibilities and vulnerability of skiing activities 48D 3.2 Development possibilities and vulnerability of water tourism activities 49D 3.3 Development possibilities and vulnerability of motor biking and cycling 49D 3.4 Development possibilities and vulnerability of culinary tourism 50D 3.5 Vulnerability summary 50D 3.6 Overall adaptation options for the tourism sector 51D 4. Discussion and conclusion 51D 5. References 52Appendix D 1. History of tourism in the Verdon catchment 54Appendix D 2. Dependence of touristic activities on different factors 55Appendix D 3. Dependence of the four main touristic activities on ecosystem services and ef-fects of the touristic activities on ecosystem services. 56Appendix D 4. Changes in tourism dependent ecosystem services under the GO and AM sce-nario 57Appendix D 5. Illustration of the two scenarios [top] Global Orchestration (GO) and [bottom] Adaptive Mosaic (AM) 58Appendix D 6. Main characteristics of the ski areas in the Allos valley (Office de Tourisme du Val d'Allos, 2009) 59

Part A

Synthesis


2

Executive SummaryThe Verdon catchment is a sparsely populated region sporting a variety of land uses and eco-nomic activities. The region is rich in biodiversity and provides a number of ecosystem serv-ices that sustain its economy. Despite low population density population, the area is beingincreasingly stressed by natural climatic changes and changes induced by tourism, forestry andagriculture. Changes in land management are rapidly transforming the natural system in theVerdon, raising demands on natural resources and ecosystem services. Recent developments inagriculture and tourism contribute to escalate tensions between different stakeholders. To thisend the MASSIF project was designed to look at the current situation in the Verdon catchmentand reflects on the future of the region with recommendations for policy makers and stakehold-ers alike.

The analysis is based on localised scenarios designed along two of the Millennium EcosystemAssessment (MA 2005) scenarios: Adaptive Mosaic and Global Orchestration. Ecosystemservices were analysed to see how they would be affected under these scenarios. The currentstate of resources in the region indicates that agriculture, tourism and nature conservation arefacing conflicting pressures detrimental to their health as socio-biological systems. There areconflicts over water availability and land use as forest density is increasing and agriculture isbeing abandoned for want of economic viability. Our analyses indicate that water availabilityin the region is set to decrease with lower precipitation, putting pressure on irrigation services.Increasing forest cover will pose fire hazard in dry conditions and will be detrimental to agri-culture. Tourism in the region is dependent on the lakes making it vulnerable to change inwater use. In a future with an increased risk of water shortages, competition for waterresources in the region will increase impacting on the tourism and agricultural sectors as wellas the potential for the region to produce power from hydroelectricity. Key policy considera-tions arising from our analyses and adaptation strategies are summarised below.

• Current trends suggest a multi-stakeholder dialogue would help bring out the synergies and conflicts in the region.

• Agricultural intensification should be limited. The sector will benefit from a switch to organic farming. Water quality and supply as well as biodiversity will also benefit from a transition to sustainable, water efficient, low chemical input agriculture combined with measures to protect strategic natural habitats.

• Controlled changes in forest cover are required to enhance forest diversity while safeguarding against pest attacks and forest fires.

• Tourism sector will require increased infrastructural facilities as well as the restoration and upgrade of existing infrastructure.

• Local markets should be encouraged for sheep products and agricultural products to reduce effects of global market fluctuations and safeguard local livelihoods.

• Water storage and capture should be encouraged at individual and community level.


3

Policy Recommendations

• Initiate a multi-stakeholder dialogue to create an integrated regional management plan.

• Limit agricultural intensification through policies that encourage and assist a shift to organic production.

• Encourage local capture and storage of water through one-off rebate payments for the installation of water tanks or wells in villages in the region, protect the headwaters of the rivers by restricting development of infrastructure.

• Maintain small patches of forest cover in the headwaters of the catchment.

• Create a forest management body to monitor, regulate and manage changes in forest cover, fire frequency and invasive species.

• Upgrade, enhance and restore tourism infrastructure

• Encourage and foster local markets agricultural products

• Introduce water retention techniques. Restrict forest clearing and infrastructure development around the water bodies.

• Provide payment for ES for production at regional level, Subsides for conservation measures and provide subsidies based on sheep herd size.

• Continuing the "hors circuit, hors saison"-programme and Establishing an "integrated regional management plan", in order to Strengthen cooperation between agriculture and tourism, and increase bond between tourism sector and natural conservation sector.

• Shift tourism flows to the off-season by a differentiated pricing system.

• Strengthen cooperation between agriculture and tourism. For example, through agreements to postpone lavender harvest or through promoting local produce and culinary tourism. Encouraging tourism based around the agricultural sector has the potential to spread the impact of tourism away from areas of high conservation value.

• Create local markets and diversify farming incomes through promoting local consumption of food. This would also be linked towards culinary tourism and the development of local companies, regional and organic product identification to support economic growth.


4


5

Part A MASSIF: Synthesis

A 1. Introduction

Mapping Regional Vulnerability in the Southern Alps (MASSIF) - Evaluating Trends andDeveloping Sustainable Adaptation Strategies for the Verdon catchment (see Figure A 1.).

As the name suggests, the MASSIF project involves analysing the current state of ecosystemservices and land use in the area. This analysis is then utilised to develop multiple plausiblescenarios for future changes in socio-economy, land use and climate in the region. The inten-tion of this report is to provide vital inputs to stakeholders and policy makers to develop appro-priate adaptation strategies to provide and sustain services for all users.

With a view to look at the challenges and the potential sustainable pathways for the Verdoncatchment we have embarked on the MASSIF project.

Figure A 1. Map of land use in the Verdon catchment

In the face of impeding climatic changes and keeping the welfare of the different stakeholdersin mind it has become necessary to address the various stressors. We engage in collating exist-ing information on the important components of ecosystem services spread across the threemain sectors in the region. The project canvases the vulnerability of three key sectors - agricul-ture, nature conservation and tourism - and of the ecosystem. In addition, the synthesis reportconsiders the interaction between sectors as well as possible conflicts and synergies for adapta-tion strategies. The different scenarios developed for MASSIF are based on those of the Mil-lennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005). The different ecosystem services and their inter-relations between each sector are discussed in the following sections. The important issues andquestions across the three sectors are integrated into a cogent analysis of emerging issues.


6

A 1.1 The Verdon catchmentThe Verdon catchment (Figure A 1.) in the Alpes de Haute-Provence, South East of France, isa veritable biodiversity hotspot. This Mediterranean ecosystem includes a wide variety of land-scapes shaping and in turn being shaped by human activities. This landscape has been con-stantly evolving over the last 7000 years. Featuring Europe's largest canyon, the Verdoncatchment forms a part of the Natural Regional Park of the Verdon. A range of habitats charac-terise the area. Forests dominate the landscape, covering 70% of the land, agriculture spans16%, open landscape 10%, water 1%, settlement 1% and others uses cover 1%. Land use isdefined by agriculture, forestry and, more recently, tourism.

The land use in the region has undergone some rapid changes over the last century. Life in theVerdon catchment is dependent on a variety of ecosystem services - benefits provided by eco-systems for human life such as water filtration, pollination and soil formation. Changes in landuse over the past 50 years, specifically the abandonment of farms and the recovery of forestshave affected the biodiversity and ecosystem services in the region. Now there is a move to re-populate farming areas and with that ecosystems are set to undergo further changes. The vul-nerability of the mountain ecosystems to climate change and the fragility of the ecosystemsthemselves warrant attention. Given the present state of affairs, planning and policy decisionswhich shape the future of the region cannot be developed without due consideration of land useand climatic changes.

A 1.2 MethodologyIn order to complete the vulnerability assessment, the 27 members of the MASSIF projectteam split into four working groups: agriculture, nature conservation, tourism and a group tosynthesise and integrate the findings of the assessment. Delegates from each of the sectoralworking groups collaborated with the synthesis group throughout the project to ensure commu-nication and consistency of approach throughout the project. 1

The MASSIF project is underpinned by a worldview which stresses the importance of interac-tions between humans, their culture and their environments (Boyden 1986). A conceptualframework explicitly connects the ecological and social sectors to illustrate the interconnec-tions within the coupled social-ecological system (see Figure A 2.). The framework is intendedto represent an interconnected biophysical and social system, with ecosystems services situ-ated between the two systems. Ecosystem services is located at the intersection of these twosystems because while they are provided by biophysical processes, they are conceptualised as'services', and thus utilised by the social system. This overview framework can be used tounderstand and illustrate the feedbacks between the ecosystem, ecosystem services and thesocial system. This whole system is embedded within a regional, national and global system inwhich influences and feedbacks translate across all scales from the regional to the global andvice versa. More specifically the framework is intended to provide an illustration of the driversthat impact on and are in turn affected by the coupled social-ecological system. The drivers ofchange (climate change, technology, land use, culture, population, economics and policies) aresituated across the regional, national and global domains as these drives will be influence bydecisions and actions at all scales. In the diagram, the arrows are intended to represent feed-backs across and between the different aspects of the system (the diagram is not intended torepresent relative strength or scale of any feedbacks; the different sized arrows are illustrativeonly).

1.We would like to thank and acknowledge the work of the delegates Lisa Freudenberger (nature conser-vation), Pénélope Lamarque (agriculture) and Zlatko Petrin (tourism).


7

Research methods included: • Literature review• A field trip to the Verdon catchment to meet with stakeholders and assess impacts from

land use and land use change • Interviews with key stakeholder representatives from each sector and representative from

the European Environmental Administration

Figure A 2. Conceptual framework of coupled social-ecological system.

The intention of the report is to evaluate future impacts of global change2 and to develop adap-tation strategies that will maintain biodiversity and a sustainable future for the region. Theevaluation comprised four stages:• Identification of Drivers, Pressures, Impacts, current State, Responses (DPISR)• Identification of main ecosystem services in the region• Vulnerability assessment• Identification of possible adaptation strategies

The DPISR (Drivers, Pressures, Impacts, State, Responses) conceptual framework was used asa heuristic to enable the project team to easily identify and conceptualise key aspects and driv-

2.Global change in this context represents both climatic change as well as land use change and associatedchange to social and cultural networks in the region.


8

ers influencing current and future change in the Verdon. Key ecosystem services utilised byeach sector were identified, as were the benefits derived from and pressures on each service.The synthesis group then worked with this material to assess cross-sectoral use of ecosystemservices in order to identify potential areas of conflict.

In the MASSIF project, vulnerability is seen to be the degree to which a system is susceptibleand unable to cope with global change, including climate change. It is a function of the magni-tude of exposure, the sensitivity of a system (or aspect of the system) to change, which is mod-erated by the adaptive capacity of the region. Each of the working groups used the informationgathered through the DPSIR framework to determine exposure and sensitivity of each ecosys-tem service to change and from that, the vulnerability was assessed.

Possible adaptation strategies were identified both through the DPSIR framework and throughthe vulnerability assessment. The sectoral working groups then identified potential adaptionstrategies for their sector and again, the synthesis group assessed this material across to iden-tify cross-sectoral synergies and also potential conflicts in adaptation strategies.

A 1.3 Limitations Time and access to resources were a major limitation of this study. Consequently, only twofuture scenarios were considered, rather than the complete suit of scenarios covered by theMA. With further time and funding, a more complete assessment of four scenarios would havefacilitated a more detailed analysis. A second limitation of the study was the poor integrationof methodological approaches across the working groups. Although the groups utilised a simi-lar approach for the assessment of vulnerability in the region, the groups had difficulty reach-ing a consensus on the details of the processes. The learning process to coordinate groups tooktime, and it was difficult to harmonize the methodological approaches of the groups due tostrong differences characterising the sectors concerned. The sectoral working groups felt thatadopting the same process would oversimplify the assessment of vulnerability for their sectors.Despite the limited time and limited data, the report has been able to establish a number ofviable potential adaptation strategies and perhaps, with further funding could go into moredetail and depth to fully assess the implications of these recommendations.

A 2. Scenarios

Regionally specific scenarios were developed to assess future vulnerabilities and potentialadaptation strategies. Scenarios are plausible narratives about how the future may unfold; theyare neither projections nor predictions of future trajectories. The MASSIF project selected twoscenarios from the MA (20005), 'Global Orchestration' and 'Adapting Mosaic'. The MA sce-narios were developed with two contrasting axes: one which contrasts proactive to reactiveenvironmental policies and one in which institutions and policies are shaped by global coordi-nation and collaboration contrasted with regional management and institutions (see Figure A3.). The MA scenarios selected reflect global policies and reactive environmental management(Global Orchestration) and reactive environmental policies with regional management (Adapt-ing Mosaic).

The working group believed that these two scenarios represented the most realistic, plausiblefutures for the region - which was identified as important for all the stakeholders. Moreover,the scenarios chosen illustrate a comparison of proactive to reactive environmental policiesand also institutions and governance shaped by coordination and collaboration or by regionalmanagement and institutions. The scenarios were adapted to the Verdon catchment and pro-jected to 2050.


9

Figure A 3. Scenarios framework (adapted from MA 2005)

A 2.1 Global Orchestration scenario Under a regime of global trade and economic liberalisation, the importance of local market inthe region declines. Liberalised markets lead to high economic growth in France, which flowsinto the region, and is accompanied by high investment in technological development andinnovation. High levels of international trade and movements of people result in increasedemissions of greenhouse gases - climate change continues under a business as usual scenariowith the most significant impact for the region being water shortages almost every year. Pro-duction of some agricultural products (vegetables, almonds and cereals) declines as importsincrease. The market is flooded with imports of South African and Australian wine, whichthreatens local and middle quality wine production. In contrast, high quality production of lav-ender, wine, and cheese benefits from open market, trade liberalisation.

Increased urbanisation leads to a decline in rural population and despite increased populationgrowth, small scale farming lifestyles are abandoned. Consequently, grasslands and farmlandsdecrease and forest cover increases, while fewer, larger herds of sheep become the norm. Thiscreates problems for managing landscapes, particularly with reference to forest fires. Asregional governance and policy making is weak, policy-makers adopt reactive approach toecosystems, and biodiversity problems. However, due to high movement of people, tourism inthe area flourishes as state and regions heavily promote the aesthetic, cultural and scenicvalues of the region.


10

A 2.2 Adapting Mosaic scenarioLocal institutions are working together, around institutionalized participatory platforms thatenhance an integrated management, communication and decrease conflict between stakehold-ers. Economic development in the region stabilises given the lack of interaction with interna-tional markets. Consequently, investment in technology and innovation decreases whichimpacts on agricultural production in the Verdon. Without intraregional cooperation, and poortechnological development, emissions continue to rise at a moderate level. Climate changeimpacts are moderate and water shortages become a problem every few years. Without techno-logical innovation and imports of fertilisers, regional agriculture shifts to organic production.Farmers use their grasslands for pastoralism, and size of herds decreases while the number ofherds increases. Localised markets for food distribution come to dominate the region, and pro-duction shifts towards regional self-sufficiency.

Due to the emphasis on self-reliance and local products, rural development increases. Popula-tion growth rates stabilise as out-migration to urban areas declines. With the emphasis onregional decision-making, water management is shifted towards integrated catchment basedplanning and the quality of the water is improved. However given the slow pace of technologi-cal development, irrigation technologies remain much the same as they were at the turn of thecentury. There is an increased focus on regional development and with that, a decrease inmovement of goods and people across the region, which has flow on impacts for tourism.

A 3. Results

A 3.1 Current use of ecosystem services in the Verdon catchmentThe following table gathers the most important ecosystem services in the Verdon catchment.Table A 2. indicates the interconnections between the three sectors, illustrating the reliance ofthe region on the production of ecosystem services. As the table demonstrates, all sectors relyon the majority of services. Moreover, the water provision, flow regulation, water quality arerelatively important service, because they are very important or moderately important in differ-ent sectors. Agriculture is more reliant on provisioning, regulating and supporting service, butless dependent on cultural service. This is interesting to note given that the aesthetic value ofthe agricultural landscape underpins the provision of cultural services for the tourism sector.The nature conservation sector is more reliant on regulating and supporting services and is also

Table A 1. Summary of major trends under different scenarios

Global Orchestration Adaptive Mosaic

Average income growth High Medium, then increases

Income distribution Equal As today, then becomes more equal

Improvement of technolog-ical efficiency

Medium-high, then medium Medium-low

International cooperation Strong Week

Attitude towards environ-mental policies

Reactive Proactive - learning

Energy supply Market liberalisation, selects least cost options, rapid technology change

Some preferences for clean energy resources

Climate policy No No


11

fundamental to the provision of cultural services. In addition, the tourism sector heavily relianton the provisioning and regulating services, as food tourism and recreational use of waterresources are a major feature which attracts visitors to the region.

+++ Very Important; ++ Moderately Important; + Minor Importance; - Threat

* For definitions of these ecosystem services see Appendix A 1.

Table A 2. Cross-sector analysis of the importance of ecosystem services*

Ecosystem service Agriculture Nature

conservation Tourism

Provisioning services

Food Produc-tion

+++ - +

Water provi-sion

+++ +++ ++

Regulating services

Flow regula-tion

+++ +++ +++

Water quality +++ ++ +++

Fire regulation + +++ ++

Erosion control +++ ++ +

Climate regula-tion

++ +++ +

Pollination +++ +++ +

Supporting services

Soil formation +++ ++

Primary Pro-duction

+++ +++ +

Nutrient cycling

+++ +++

Provision of habitat

+++ +

Cultural serv-ices

Recreational services

+ + +++

Aesthetic serv-ices

++ +++ +++

Educational services

+ +++ +


12

Table A 3. Synergies and conflicts in current use and provision of ecosystem services


13

A 3.2 Synergies and conflicts in current use of ecosystem services in theVerdon catchmentAs Table A 3. illustrates, the potential for both conflicts and synergies arise through the useand provision of ecosystem services in The Verdon. The two major areas of potential conflict,both now and into the future arise from competing expectations on water and on the relation-ship between an open or forested landscape. The picture, however, is not completely bleak.There are also potential synergies between the sectors - for example, all sectors benefit fromsupporting ecosystem services as they provide the platform for ecosystem services in theregion. Moreover, high levels of both water quality and water provision are important for allsectors. This could become a potential for both synergies and conflict between the sectors.While it is in the interest of all sectors to prevent the degradation of water quality, hence apotential synergy, conflict may arise in the context of water shortages particularly if agriculturecontinues to co-opt much of the water supply. Interestingly, there is also the potential for bothsynergies and conflicts within sectors. For example, the region as a whole will benefit fromincreased capital flow from tourism; however, high visitation to the region could compromiserecreational services through overcrowding or conservation values through the impacts of visi-tation on ecosystems and habitat.

The key insights from the analysis is summarised as follows:• Main conflicts

• Water shortages - current conflicts over water will be exacerbated through increased demand across sectors in combination with climate change induced reduction in precipitation• Open versus closed landscape - conflict between protection of the cultural landscape, which supports small scale pastoralism and reforestation of the landscape which is driven by abandonment of agriculture

• The agricultural sector has the most synergies with other sectors, making it a key activity influencing the future of the region in the catchment - however, its centrality to all sectors and the need to capitalize on multiple ecosystem services makes agriculture a potential site of conflict in the region.

A 4. Future scenarios

According to the Table A 4., the two scenarios influence the evolution of the ecosystems serv-ices in differing ways. The Adapting Mosaic scenario offers more positive evolution of theecosystems services than Global Orchestration. Indeed, on the totality of the fifteen ecosys-tems services provided by the Verdon catchment, the Global Orchestration scenario enhancesthree of them, deteriorates eleven of them while one remains the same. In contrast, the Adapt-ing Mosaic scenario improves seven ecosystems services, deteriorates five of them and threeremain identical.

If we superimpose the Table A 4. and Table A 3., we can identify which scenario could poten-tially decrease the two major areas of potential conflict between ecosystems services which areon water and on the relationship between an open or forested landscape. The Adapting Mosaicscenario corresponds to improvement in the following ecosystem services: water provision,flow regulation and water quality. Looking to the potential conflict between the agriculture andthe nature conservation sectors, the Adapting Mosaic scenario seems to better meet the needsof these sectors, except concerning the ecosystem service of food production where the GlobalOrchestration enhances this service.

To conclude, the characteristics of the Adapting Mosaic scenario seems to be provide moreoptions for improving the ecosystem services in the Verdon catchment.


14

Table A 4. Ecosystem services in the Verdon catchment under future scenarios

A 5. Recommendations and adaptation strategies

This report has illustrated the interconnections between and within the coupled social-ecologi-cal system of the Verdon catchment. It has shown how reliant the three key sectors in theregion are on ecosystem services. However, potential conflict over ecosystem services in theregion could undermine the value of these services to sustainable development and biodiver-sity conservation. Consequently, it is important that adaptation strategies seek to minimizeconflict and maximize potential synergies.

Agriculture will remain a key sector in the region under both scenarios. Under Global Orches-tration it will be fundamental to the economic viability of the region, whereas it will providefood self-sufficiency under Adaptive Mosaic. As such, adaptation strategies are required toprotect agricultural productivity while minimising impacts on biodiversity. While tourism tothe region plays out differently under the two scenarios, it will still remain an important con-tributor to economic development in the region over the coming decade. Given the potentialimpact of these two sectors on biodiversity, cooperation between sectors is imperative. Conse-quently, our primary recommendation is the implementation of an integrated regional develop-ment strategy, to be determined through a participatory process with representation from allsectors, regional officials and the public. Regardless of what the future holds, adaptation strat-egies that are aligned with current policies and underpinned by the principles of sustainabledevelopment are an important first step to prepare a region for a future of global change(Dovers 2009). This participatory process can also be used as a platform for education aboutstrategies to reduce water consumption and maintain water qualities.

The primary findings of this report indicate potential future conflict over water and land-usechange thus key recommendations are focused on these two issues.

• Initiate a multi-stakeholder dialogue to create an integrated regional management plan.


15

• Limit agricultural intensification through policies that encourage and assist a shift to organic production.

• Encourage local capture and storage of water through one-off rebate payments for the installation of water tanks or wells in villages in the region, protect the headwaters of the rivers by restricting development of infrastructure.

• Maintain small patches of forest cover in the headwaters of the catchment.

• Create a forest management body to monitor, regulate and manage changes in forest cover, fire frequency and invasive species.

• Upgrade, enhance and restore tourism infrastructure

• Encourage and foster local markets agricultural products

• Introduce water retention techniques. Restrict forest clearing and infrastructure development around the water bodies.

• Provide payment for ES for production at regional level, Subsides for conservation measures and provide subsidies based on sheep herd size.

• Continuing the "hors circuit, hors saison"-programme and Establishing an "integrated regional management plan", in order to Strengthen cooperation between agriculture and tourism, and increase bond between tourism sector and natural conservation sector.

• Shift tourism flows to the off-season by a differentiated pricing system.

• Strengthen cooperation between agriculture and tourism. For example, through agreements to postpone lavender harvest or through promoting local produce and culinary tourism. Encouraging tourism based around the agricultural sector has the potential to spread the impact of tourism away from areas of high conservation value.

• Create local markets and diversify farming incomes through promoting local consumption of food. This would also be linked towards culinary tourism and the development of local companies, regional and organic product identification to support economic growth.

A 6. References

Boyden S (1986) An integrative approach to the study of human ecology. In: Borden RJ,Jacobs J, Young GL (eds) Human ecology: a gathering of perspectives. The Societyfor Human Ecology, College Park, Maryland, USA, 3-25.

Dovers S (2009) Normalising adaptation. Global Environmental Change 19(1):4-6.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being:opportunities and challenges for business and industry. World Resources Institute,Washington DC.


16

Appendix A 1. Definitions of ecosystem services


Food production - The harvesting of sunlight for agricultural goods.

Water provision - Water availability for irrigation and drinking.

Regulating

Water quality - The degree to which water provided to the catchment is polluted.

Flow regulation - Level of disturbance on the natural flow regime.

Fire regulation - Limiting the spread of fire, and controlling the incidence of fire.

Erosion control - Resistance to soil mass loss.

Climate regulation - Resistance to certain changes in climate conditions.

Pollination - Fertilisation of plants to facilitate crop yields.

Supporting

Soil formation - Rate of replenishment of soil.

Primary production - Production of green biomass.

Nutrient cycling - Flux of nutrients through a particular system- soil, air and water.

Provision of habitat - Amount of good quality habitat remaining in the region

Cultural

Recreational services - Value, use and enjoyment of landscape through physical activities forpleasure of tourists and local people.

Aesthetic services - Certain characteristics of the particular area; both traditional, cultural andnatural landscapes.

Educational services - Interactions with landscape for gaining and sharing knowledge forchildren, people, scientists


17

Appendix A 2. Summary of interviews

A series of interviews were conducted by the MASSIF project team to identify the points ofview, interests and needs of local key stakeholders. Interviewees included: a farmer, a tourismofficer, a manager of Natural Park of Le Verdon, a representative of the Europe EnvironmentalAgency, and the EU Commission Officer. A summary of their responses, synergies as well aspotential sources of conflict is now presented. In general, most stakeholders noticed the cli-mate change and want to know more information about the climate change consequences andenvironment vulnerability. All stakeholders consider that it is crucial to protect the environ-ment and landscape. For example, the tourism sector expresses the fact that they want toencourage activities that maximises economic benefit and minimise impacts.

There was common agreement that water shortage and water use are the biggest problem. Themanager of Natural Park of Le Verdon indicates that main pressures come from farmers withthe use of water for almonds and corn and from sheep farming. For him, sheep farmingdegrades ecosystem because of too many sheep, too big flock and he recommends smallerflock, better disseminate, and moving from different places. Finally, he doesn't see any conflictin the area in the future.

Concerning the landscape, both farmers and the tourism officer indicated that keeping an openlandscape is important to their sectors. In their view this helps to control fire and invasive spe-cies while contributing to the aesthetic values of the region. The national park manager indi-cates they are willing to open the landscape too. Indeed, the Natural Conservation sectorfocuses on management of landscape which depends of the evolution of the climate. They saidthat they will be obliged to open the landscape if beetles (invasive species) continue to eat theleaves from the threes.

Interviews indicated problems of communication. The farmers said they were willing to com-municate with tourism but the tourism officers suggested that communication with the farmersis complicated and that the farmers do not want to take part in the tourism activities. Most ofstakeholders especially the government sectors expressed the need to be inform as a prelimi-nary step to prevent any conflict. Furthermore, the EEA (the EU public agency) needs practicalrecommendations from local stakeholders with explanations of why each strategy is importantto elaborate policy tools.


18

Part B


20


21

Part B MASSIF: Agricultural Sector

B 1. Introduction

Biodiversity reflects the number, variety and variability of living organisms in an ecosystem.Many people have benefited over the last century from the conversion of natural ecosystems tohuman-dominated ecosystems and the exploitation of biodiversity. At the same time, theselosses in biodiversity and changes in ecosystem services have caused some people to experi-ence declining well-being, with poverty in some social groups being exacerbated (MA 2005).Agricultural practices contribute directly (through provisioning, regulating, and cultural eco-system services) and indirectly (through supporting ecosystem services) to many constituentsof human well-being. (MA 2003).

Located in the center of Europe, the alpine region is a hot spot for biodiversity. During the lasttwo centuries, human influence on biodiversity has become increasingly negative through landuse and land cover changes, as well as alterations of biogeochemical cycles, and through densepopulation and competing needs for settlements, infrastructure, agriculture and recreation. TheAlpine region already suffers from a higher increase in temperatures than the European aver-age. Increasing pressures arising from changes in socio-economic conditions, land-use andland management practices, resource exploitation, increase in traffic and increased tourismaggravate the situation.

B 1.1 ObjectivesThis chapter aims to develop adaptation strategies to sustain ecosystem services in the VerdonCatchment under two plausible future scenarios, derived from the Millennium EcosystemAssessment (MA 2005). We addressed the following questions: (1) What are the underlyingdrivers and pressures for the agricultural sector that relate to biodiversity? (2) How will theagricultural sector react to future scenarios? (3) What policies should be adapted to sustainlocal livelihoods, human well being and biodiversity in the future?

B 1.2 MethodologyA model was ascribed as a framework for collating and assessing data, see Figure B 1.

Data were collected by active involvement of five stakeholders representing the agricultural,tourism and nature conservation sectors in the Verdon catchment; along with that from litera-ture, GIS land use maps (CORINE 2000) and the AGRESTE and INSEE databases. Collatedinformation formed the basis for determining drivers and pressures underlying the current situ-ation of the agricultural sector in the region, and the sensitivity of these to global changes.Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM, www.fcmappers.net) was used to determine the role of alldrivers and pressures relevant to agriculture in the region, along with relations and strength ofrelations between them (Appendix B 3. a). The FCM model was used to assess the vulnerabil-ity of all ecosystem services by determining exposure (number of influences), sensitivity (sumof absolute strength of influences) and adaptive capacity (qualitive assessment) (Table B 2. ).After vulnerability assessment we used the FCM model to implement the Adaptive Mosaic andGlobal Orchestration scenarios of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005)(Appendix B 3. b and c). For each scenario the drivers were weighted based on regionaliseddata provided by the synthesis group of the MASSIF project. The current situation and sce-nario results were used to detect the most vulnerable ecosystem services in order to writepolicy recommendations.


22

Figure B 1. Method for vulnerability assessment and scenario development for the agricultural sector in the Verdon catchment

B 2. Results

B 2.1 Current stateIn 1997, more or less 2/3 of this area got classified as a Regional Natural Park (PNR du Ver-don). According to the last census (1999), 23760 inhabitants occupied this area of 1874 km²(12,7 inhabitant/km²), but during the two summer months the population can reach up to200000 people, due to tourism. Currently the number of new migrants into the region isincreasing. It is estimated that the population will increase 25% by 2020 but 85% of these willbe retired and of advanced age.

In the Verdon catchment region reforestation on slopes has always fluctuated while flat areashave always been farmed (van Eetvelde and Anrop 2004). At present, reforestation has beenoccurring naturally due to a decrease in sheep grazing and a lack of logging infrastructure.Reforestation is perceived as a factor increasing fire risk, whilst also reducing water availabil-ity for other uses.

There is no real scheme of irrigation implemented in the region with the primary crops of Lav-ender and wheat not requiring irrigation at all. Organic farming is increasing in the region with10077 ha accounted for in 2004 (between 2001 and 2004 areas increased by 255% and thenumber of farmers by 161%) due to subsidies incentives.

B 2.2 Land useLand use in the Verdon catchment area is diverse (Figure B 2. and Appendix B 1. ) with agri-culture currently corresponding to about 17% of the total surface. Forested areas account for59%, whilst grasslands (which are partially used for grazing) corresponding to about 13%. Ofagricultural land use 45% is grazing/pasture land, and about 30% available as non irrigatedarable land (incl. lavender production). Lavender and sheep production can be considered thetwo most important agricultural uses in the Verdon catchment region. Additional agriculturalland uses include wheat production, truffle production (associated to oak tree plantations) andsome fruit trees (plums, almonds, grapes, prunes and olives).

The PNR area within the Verdon catchment is occupied mainly by forest (40%) and agriculture(25%). The agricultural sector occupies 2,1% of the gross added value of the PACA.

FCM

stakeholders

DPSI

Current

Vulnerability analysis:Exposure, sensitivity,

adaptive capacity

Literature/GIS

scenarios

Detection of vulnerable eco-system services

Responses: Policy

recommendations

ES

Scenarios


23

Figure B 2. left: Land use map of the Verdon catchment area; right: Different land uses in the Verdon catchment area

B 2.3 Ecosystem services, drivers and pressuresCrucial ecosystem services in the Verdon catchment are highlighted in Table B 1. They aredivided by provisioning, regulation, cultural and supporting services (see MA 2005). The driv-ers and pressures underlying these services are defined in Appendix B 2.

Table B 1. Ecosystem services related to agriculture in the Verdon catchment

B 2.4 Vulnerability assessmentThe 'current state' FCM model was used to score linkages between the drivers and pressures onecosystem services with the Verdon catchment. Scores for each of the vulnerability drivers(exposure (E), sensitivity (S) and adaptive capacity (AC)) were then subdivided into low (l),moderate (m) to high (h) and very high (vh) (Table B 2. )

Crop yield (Evh, Sh) is particularly sensitive to changes in nutrient cycling, water availabilityand land available for growing crops. Agricultural diseases (and pests), water pollutants andstability of nutrient cycling are also important. Due to the nature of agriculture in the region

Ecosystem Services

Provisioning Regulating Cultural Supporting

Crops

Water provision

Timber

Water regulation

Fire regulation

Pollination

Pest control

Aesthetics

Recreational

Nutrient cycling

Soil formation

Primary

production


24

irrigation is of lesser importance; although this could change should water availability decrease(Falloon and Betts 2009; Theurillat and Guisan 2001; Warner 2006). Timber yield (El, Sl) de-

Table B 2. Ecosystem services and their vulnerability

Type of Ecosystem service

Ecosystem services Vulnerability Current status

Global Orches-tration

Adaptive Mosaic

Provisioning Crop yield Exposure 7 7 7

Provisioning Crop yield Sensitivity 3.7 4.7 4.2 Provisioning Crop yield Adaptive capacity 0.6 0.3 0.4 Provisioning Crop yield increase/ decrease decrease decrease

Provisioning Sheep products Exposure 1 1 1 Provisioning Sheep products Sensitivity 0.3 0.5 0.1

Provisioning Sheep products Adaptive capacity 0.7 0.3 0.7 Provisioning Sheep products increase/ decrease decrease increase

Provisioning Timber Exposure 2 2 2 Provisioning Timber Sensitivity 0.8 1 0.8 Provisioning Timber Adaptive capacity 0.8 0.9 0.7

Provisioning Timber increase/ decrease decrease decrease Provisioning Water provision Exposure 3 3 3

Provisioning Water provision Sensitivity 0.8 1.3 1.4 Provisioning Water provision Adaptive capacity 0.7 0.4 0.6

Provisioning Water provision increase/ decrease decrease decrease Regulating Water regulation Exposure 3 3 3 Regulating Water regulation Sensitivity 0.7 0.8 0.7

Regulating Water regulation Adaptive capacity 0.6 0.4 0.5 Regulating Water regulation increase/ decrease increase decrease

Regulating Fire regulation Exposure 4 4 4 Regulating Fire regulation Sensitivity 1.1 2.4 1.4

Regulating Fire regulation Adaptive capacity 0.6 0.2 0.4 Regulating Fire regulation increase/ decrease increase decrease Regulating Pollination Exposure 6 6 6

Regulating Pollination Sensitivity 2.2 2.2 2.2 Regulating Pollination Adaptive capacity 0.5 0.3 0.8

Regulating Pollination increase/ decrease decrease decrease Cultural Aesthetics Exposure 5 5 5 Cultural Aesthetics Sensitivity 0.8 1 0.6

Cultural Aesthetics Adaptive capacity 0.5 0.6 0.4 Cultural Aesthetics increase/ decrease increase decrease

Cultural Recreational Exposure 5 5 5 Cultural Recreational Sensitivity 1.7 2.5 1.3

Cultural Recreational Adaptive capacity 0.5 0.6 0.4 Cultural Recreational increase/ decrease increase decrease


25

Exposure: 1-2 = low 3-4 = medium 5-6 = high 7-8 = very highSensitivity: 0-1 = low, 1-2 medium, 2-3 high, 3-5 very highAdaptive capacity: 0.1-0.2 = low, 0.3-0.4 = medium, 0.5-0.7 = high, 0.8-1 = very high. (see Appendix B 5. for information on valuation of adaptive capacity of ecosystem services in current state

and future scenarios).

pends mainly on reforestation and plantations. Due to high percentage of forest cover in theregion, timber yield is likely to remain stable. Increases (or decreases) in forest cover has thelargest expected impact on future timber yield, although a small risk of increased wild firesmay affect production. The ecosystem service 'sheep products' is represented here by thenumber of sheep (El, Sl) and grazing-land cover (Eh, Sh). Changes in forest cover and thenumber of shepherds is likely to be the most important here, along with water availability andto a lesser extent erosion of the landscape (van Eetvelde and Antrop 2004). The ecosystemservices allowing the potential to keep sheep are not likely to be overly affected. Howeverfarmer wellbeing is obviously influenced through other measures such as income.

Soil Formation (Evh, Sh) is highly sensitive to changes in forest cover, erosion and arable landcover, whilst grazing land cover and the quantity of grazing sheep are also likely to have someinfluence. To a lesser extent crop yield and water availability may also exert a minor influence(Warner 2006). Nutrient cycling (Eh, Sh) is highly dependent on water availability and forestcover, partly through an increase in soil formation. On the other hand nutrient cycling isstrongly decreased in areas exposed to erosion due to the loss of nutrients via surface runoffand leaching. Lesser important factors that stimulate nutrient cycling are better growth of cropsand the area of grazing and arable land (Descroix and Gautier 2002). One major ecosystemservice is pollination (Eh, Sh). Availability of arable land, crop yield and to a lesser extentgrazing pastures have the largest positive influences on pollination. Loss of plants throughcrop disease, or an increase in forest cover is likely to impact upon pollination. Smaller influ-ences may exist from water availability and the number of grazing sheep.

Income of farmers and shepherds (Em, Svh) is particularly dependent on the market price ofthe produce, the yield and government subsidies. For shepherds the income depends predomi-nantly on subsidies and the regional market price of meat. As the global price of sheep meatincreases however, this will negatively effect on the shepherds income as it can be producedcheaper in foreign countries. For the lavender farmer increasing global market prices will pos-

Type of Ecosystem service

Ecosystem services Vulnerability Current status

Global Orches-tration

Adaptive Mosaic

Supporting Nutrient cycling Exposure 6 6 6

Supporting Nutrient cycling Sensitivity 2.8 2.8 2.8 Supporting Nutrient cycling Adaptive capacity 0.5 0.2 0.3 Supporting Nutrient cycling increase/ decrease decrease Decrease

Supporting Soil formation Exposure 8 8 7 Supporting Soil formation Sensitivity 2.7 2.7 2.2

Supporting Soil formation Adaptive capacity 0.3 0.4 0.4 Supporting Soil formation increase/ decrease increase Increase

Supporting Primary production Exposure 5.5 5.5 5.5 Supporting Primary production Sensitivity 2.4 3.55 2.8 Supporting Primary production Adaptive capacity 0.5 0.3 0.4

Supporting Primary production increase/ decrease no change decrease


26

itively affect the farmers income as the South of France is traditionally of global importancefor lavender production (Guenther 1954). Regional prices of produce are important for thefarmers income as well, considering the production of cash crops such as wheat to guarantee acertain income. Those products are sold on the regional market.

B 2.5 Applying future scenarios in the FCM modelWeight changes in the FCM model for Global Orchestration (GO) mainly responded to higherpressure related to climate change, the strong global market, increased forest cover, and anincrease in tourism. Accordingly, weight changes in the FCM model for Adaptive Mosaic(AM) mainly responded to an increase in organic farming, the strong local market, moderatepressure related to climate change, and to some extent to added payments for ecosystem serv-ices. See Annex 4 for explanations for each change.

Adaptive capacities were in general highest in the current state, second highest in AdaptiveMosaic , and lowest in Global Orchestration. The reason for these differences were mainly dueto higher pressure related to climate change in Global Orchestration than in Adaptive Mosaic,and to an increase in organic farming in Adaptive Mosaic.

According to the vulnerability analysis, the ecosystem services standing out as most vulnerable(with scenario in brackets) were crop yield (GO and AM), sheep products (GO), fire regulation(GO), pollination (GO), water regulation (AM), and recreation (AM).

B 3. Policy recommendations

Policy recommendations will be presented mainly focusing on the most vulnerable ecosystemservices, according to the previous vulnerability assessment and considering each chosen sce-nario. These recommendations are mainly adaptive strategies designed to promote sustainabil-ity and regional economic development. Hence, these recommendations are mostly policyrelevant rather than policy prescriptive. It is important to note that the responses and linkedpolicy recommendations were designed in a holistic way for each scenario. The response foran ecosystem service change must comply with those designed for other ecosystem services.

B 3.1 Global OrchestrationGenerally, the recommendations for the Global Orchestration scenario focus mainly on finan-cial incentives to extensify land management.

In this scenario, the most vulnerable ecosystem services are: crop yield (including lavender),sheep farming, fire regulation and pollination.

Regarding crop yield, a decrease is expected. This situation can be prevented through theregionalization of production, in an extensified manner in order to enhance biodiversity in theregion. Technology development may become valuable for this purpose but special attentionshould be given to it in order to prevent impacts on biodiversity. Machinery replacementshould privilege the most sustainable available options. In terms of policy, payments for theecosystem services provided by extensified wildlife-friendly farming, through agri-environ-mental measures, could be applied.

Concerning sheep farming, a decrease is also expected under this scenario. The response to thispossibility may rely on the creation of local markets and application of some market regula-tion. The extensification of grazing into lower quality grasslands may also increase soil fertil-ity, thus benefiting biodiversity. Diversification of economic activities by the farmers,incorporating tourism, is another possible response. New policy may be useful if directed to


27

the extensification of grazing areas, through forest management. Policy directed to the empow-erment of local farmers is recommended. Taking into account the price competition with ani-mals imported from foreign countries, tax options are also recommended to prevent anunbalanced market. The development of local structures to provide economic support andadvice on diversification, with biodiversity in mind, is also recommended.

Fire regulation services will increase under the present scenario. An adequate response relieson increased forest management. This may allow for better fire cycle control, reforestationcontrol and prevention of alien species invasion. The implementation of a forest managementauthority is recommended.

Pollination services are expected to decrease. A response to this possibility should include areduction in chemical application on the fields. Measures to prevent habitat fragmentation arealso advisable. Policy should then consider benefits to promote organic farming, extensifica-tion and intercropping.

B 3.2 Adaptive MosaicThe recommendations for the Adaptive Mosaic scenario aim mostly at the development oftools to improve the local distribution of regional products and to adopt a responsible use ofwater. In this scenario, the most vulnerable ecosystem services are: crop yield (including lav-ender), water regulation and recreation.

Regarding crop yield, a decrease is expected under this scenario. The promotion of organicfarming is a viable response, with positive impact on biodiversity. It may offset the decline inconventional farming and provide products of higher value. Concerning water regulation, adecrease is also expected. Measures to capture the water using local, low-impact reservoirs arerecommended, maintaining current farming practices and biodiversity. Policy directed topublic education and promoting the introduction of water retention techniques is recom-mended. Finally, regarding recreation activities, these services are also expected to decreaseunder this scenario. The creation of local markets, diversifying farming incomes, is recom-mended. Tourism activities involving the local population and promotion of local companies,labelling, distribution and consumption of local products, are viable responses. Policy shouldintegrate tourism and agriculture production, include the creation of trademark and promotethe eco-label.

B 4. References

AGRESTE (Ministère de l'alimentation, de l'agriculture et de la pêche) (2005) Mementoagricole et rural, Alpes de Hautes-Provence. Available at http://agreste.agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/D0406C01.pdf

Descroix L, Gautier E (2002) Water erosion in the southern French alps: climatic and humanmechanisms. Catena 50: 53-85.

Falloon P, Betts R (2009) Climate impacts on European agriculture and water management inthe context of adaptation and mitigation - The importance of an integrated approach.Science of the Total Environment doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.05.002

FCM: www.fcmappers.net

Guenther E (1954) The French lavender and lavendin industry. Economic Botany 8(2):166-173.


28

INSEE (Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques) Provences-Alpes-Côtesd'Azur (2008) Parc du Verdon: un développement différencié entre est et ouest. SudINSEE L'essentiel 123. Available at http://www.insee.fr/fr/insee_regions/provence/themes/sud_essentiel/sie123/sie123.pdf

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: aframework for assessment, Island Press, Washington DC.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being:biodiversity synthesis, World Resources Institute, Washington DC.

Theurillat JP, Guisan A (2001) Potential impact of climate change on vegetation in theEuropean Alps: a review. Climatic Change 50:77-109.

Van Eetvelde V, Antrop M (2004) Analyzing structural and functional changes of traditionallandscapes - two examples from Southern France. Landscape and Urban Planning 67:79-95.

Warner RF (2006) Natural and artificial linkages and discontinuities in a Mediterraneanlandscape: Some case studies from the Durance Valley, France. Catena 66: 236-250.


29

Appendix B 1. Pie chart showing the agricultural land cover in the Verdoncatchment


30

Appendix B 2. Definitions of drivers and pressures Driving forces Description

Government subsidies EU Common Agricultural Policy Subsidies aimed at supporting

Income shepherd Flow of money directly to the shepherd

Income farmer Flow of money directly into the farm

Market price (regional) Market price of produce on a regional scale

Market price (global) Market price of produce on a global scale

Crop yield The total output of produce from each farm # shepherds Number of people working as a shepherd

# arable farms Number of businesses producing directly within the

Irrigation Water application to improve crop yields

Arable land cover Geographic range of individual farmstead

Plantation forest Planted forest

Natural afforestation Natural forest succession

Forest cover Total cover of forest, including natural forest and plantation

Grazing land cover Land implicitly available for grazing of livestock Timber yield Production of timber (from natural and planted forest)

Tourism Number of tourists visiting the Verdon Catchment

Rural population Number of inhabitants

Aesthetics The visual attractiveness of the landscape

Pressures Description

Natural afforestation Natural succession of forest

Water availability Availability of water for agricultural use

Agricultural diseases Crop or livestock pests/diseases resulting in yield reductions

Evaporation Capacity of the ecosystem to hold water Wild fire Occurrence of wild fires

Erosion Loss of soil organic material

Water pollutants Amount of pollutants in the water

Water stored in reservoirs Amount of water in artificial water bodies

Pollination Number of pollinators

Nutrient cycling Ability of the ecosystem to capture recycle nutrients

Soil formation Build up of organic compounds with soils


31

Appendix B 3. Conceptual model for the Verdon catchment

(a) FCM of the current situation

(b) FCM of the Global Orchestration scenario in 2050


32

(c) FCM of the Adaptive Mosaic scenario in 2050


33

Appendix B 4. Table of weights in scenarios and adaptive capacity

Scenario 1: Global Orchestration (GO)

Dependent variables

Independent variables

Current state

Adapting to GO

explanation

Crop yield Income 0.7 0.9 depending on global marketIncome Soil formation -0.2 -0.5 Because of global market;

prices put more pressure on crops per yield since

Agriculture diseases Crop yield -0.3 -0.8 Less/no subsidies; More pressure on crop yields

Number of shepherds

Grazing land cover

0.8 0.4 Less links because of more forest cover

Arable land cover Number of farmers

0.8 0.4 Because less sheep’s, but more larger farms

Arable land cover Crop yield 0.7 1 Intensifying on the crop yield

Arable land cover Evaporation 0.3 0.1 Because of less arable land and more forest cover

Arable land cover Water pollution 0.1 -0.1 Intensifying the land coverArable land cover Soil formation -0.6 -0.3 Less land cover Grazing land cover Number of sheep 0.3 0.5 Because no more subsidiesIrrigation Crop yield 0.2 0.4 Because of more droughtsWater availability

Irrigation of crops 0.2 0.8 Climate change and droughts will increase

Water availability Forest cover 0.2 0.6 Climate change and droughts will increase

Water stored in reservoir

Water availability 0.5 1 Because of climate change


Tourism 0.3 0.5 The region depends very strong on the tourism sector


Aesthetics 0.3 0.5 Increase in tourism

Erosion Arable land cover -0.1 -0.5 Climate change and droughts will increase

Natural forest Forest cover 0.5 1 Natural forest afforestationWild fire Timber yield -0.2 -0.4 Climate change and

droughts will increase Wild fire Forest cover -0.4 -0.6 Climate change and

droughts and will increase Aesthetics Rural population 0.7 0.3 Decrease of the rural

population

Forest cover Wild fire 0.3 0.8 Climate change and droughts will increase

Wild fire Tourism -0.2 -0.4 The importance of tourism will increase

Rural population Tourism 0.1 0.5 The importance of tourism will increase


34

Scenario 2: Adaptive Mosaic (AM)

Dependent variables Independent variables

Current state

Adapting to AM

Explanation

Government subsidies Income 1 0 There are no more subsidies

Market prices

(regional)

Income 0.7 1 Because the importance of

regional markets

Market prices (global) Income (shepherds) -0.8 0 The local markets have the

main importance to the price

Market prices (global) Income (arable

land)

0.7 0 The local market have the

main importance to the price

Crop yield Income 0.7 1 Organic farming is the main

agricultural system

Crop yield Soil formation -0.2 0.2 Organic farming is the main agricultural system

Agricultural diseases Crop yield -0.3 0.2 Organic farming is the main

agricultural system

Number of farms Arable land cover 0.8 0.6 Organic farming is the main

agricultural system

Arable land cover Crop yield 0.7 1 There are no more subsidies given by the government

Arable land cover Soil formation -0.6 -0.3 Organic farming is the main

agricultural system

Grazing land Number of sheep 0.3 0.1 There are less sheep on grazing

land

Number of sheep Natural

reforestation

0.8 0.3 Decreasing of the number of

shepherds

Water availability Irrigation of crops 0.2 0.5 Climate change is taking place

in a moderate state

Water availability Water stored in

reservoirs 0.5 0.8 Climate change is taking place

in a moderate state

Water stored in

reservoirs

Aesthetics 0.3 0.1 Tourism has less importance to

the region

Tourism Market price

(regional)

0.7 0.1 Tourism has less importance to

the region

Rural population Arable land cover 0.1 0.9 The regional market is very

important for the region

Rural population Water availability 0.1 0.4 The local forces are more

important to the region

Forest cover Wild fire 0.3 0.6 Climate change is taking place

in a moderate state

Water pollutants Tourism -0.3 -0.1 Tourism has less importance to the region

Nutrient cycling Crop yield 0.3 0.6 Organic farming is the main

agricultural system


35

Appendix B 5. Valuation of adaptive capacity for the ecosystem services inthe current situation and in the different scenarios.

Crop yield - Capacity lower in GO than AM due to climate change.

Sheep products - Capacity lower in GO than AM due to forest cover increase in GO.

Timber - Capacity higher in GO due to more forest despite climate change.

Water provision - Capacity lower in GO due to climate change.

Water regulation - Capacity lower in GO due to climate change.

Fire regulation - Capacity lower in GO due to forest and climate change.

Pollination - Capacity higher in AM due to farm management.

Aesthetics - Similar capacity.

Recreational - Similar capacity.

Nutrient cycling - Capacity lower in GO due to emissions and erosion.

Soil formation - Capacity higher in GO and AM then today because of forest cover in GO andfarm management in AM.

Primary production - Capacity lower in GO than AM due to climate change.


36

Part C

MASSIF: Nature Conservation Sector

Photo: Chris Andrews

“Nature Conservation” Working GroupWalaa Adra, Veronica Agostinelli, Daniela Babicová, Imam Basuki,

Lisa Freudenberger, Daniel Kreiner, Nguyen Lam Anh, Veronica MendezTutor: Eric Arets


38


39

Part C MASSIF: Nature Conservation Sector

C 1. The Verdon catchment and it's state concerning ecosystems andservices

The Verdon catchment is a strategic area for many species and provides ecosystem services tolocal population and tourists. The area has been designated as a Regional Natural Park with theobjectives of conserving and enhancing natural and cultural heritage, develop new and experi-mental actions, increase public awareness on environmental issues and develop sustainably theterritory.

The area is characterized by high species diversity typical for areas situated between the Mediter-ranean coast and the Alps. Some of the species found in this unique area are endemic. Many spe-cies benefit from special protection measures as for example Parnassius appollo, a butterflyprotected by European regulation. The park holds one third of France's flora and it is habited bybats, chamois, bearded vulture and little bustard amongst others.

Tourism in the park is very concentrated at some sites. Nonetheless roads, hiking trails, camp-grounds and traffic are disturbing many species. Furthermore, concentrated tourism at the lakesleads to a higher concentration of nutrients which also has an effect about 2km downstream.Although there are some negative impacts from tourism it generates an important source ofincome for the local people living in the park. Agriculture is a further important source for incomein the area. Governmental subsidy leads to increasing sheep herd sizes but lower number of sheepherds compared to the past. This has lead to erosion problems and to an increase in forest cover-age decreasing abundance of many important species for the park, such as the vulture.

Various problems of the park are caused by water shortages. Beside droughts, which became morepressures in the past according to farmers in the area, unnatural variability in the water run-off ismainly caused by increasing variability in water volumes released by the dams in the river forenergy generation of Electricité de France (EDF). Prior regulation, the Verdon had an erraticregime, with floods from autumn to spring and droughts in summer. Today only very little wateris returned to the now largely inactive, shrunken channel because, after passage through upperhydroelectric power stations, it is used for irrigation and urban water supplies. Water returned tothe system contains large suspended sediment loads decreasing water quality.

In this report we define ecosystem services as the benefits people obtain from ecosystems (Fritschand Schröter 2009). Ecosystem refers to natural and biological entities that interconnect to eachother in steady state equilibrium. Biodiversity is the number, variety and variability of livingorganisms in an ecosystem, referring as the building blocks of ecosystem services.

There are several ecosystems based on land cover/use in Verdon basin (6.953 km²), which are:Forests (58.6%), agriculture (16.5%), grassland (9.6%), water bodies (1.4%), and settlement(0.6%). Local residents enjoy the benefit from this wide range of ecosystems for goods produc-tion such as cheese, dairy products, truffles, aromatic and medicinal plants and other services suchas clean water, fresh air, recreation and security from hazard. Significant number of tourists whovisit the area also get benefit through those services, especially aesthetic and health services.

The weighting of the importance of ecosystem services in the different landscapes, and the esti-mation of the vulnerability was mainly based on stakeholder meetings and interviews with localsat the field excursion in the Verdon region (Kreiner and Jolibert 2009). After discussing possibili-


40

ties to find an efficient and timesaving way to weight the different ecosystem services focusing onthe main habitat types the nature conservation workgroup decided to come up with a simple table.One of the main arguments for this solution was that we thought that it would also be a good toolto communicate the results to the stakeholders.

The Table C 1. shows the relative importance of each services provided by the different habitatsor landscape types which range in altitude from 260 m to 3.051 m a.s.l. The importance is repre-sented by (+) sign, where (+) indicates low, (++) moderate and (+++) high important. No signindicates that this certain service is not applicable under such landscape. Among all the services,we identified that water flow, water quantity, and climate regulation are significantly provided byforests. Food provision and pollination are provided by agriculture, while grassland is providingsimilar services as agriculture. Recreation service is provided mainly by water bodies, and humanshelter is provided by settlement.

C 2. Vulnerability assessment

The vulnerability of ecosystem services is analyzed by three main elements: exposure, sensitivityand adaptation capacity. We assessed the vulnerability of the ecosystems for the two drivers: Cli-mate and land-use change.

C 2.1 Climate change vulnerability assessmen:The assessment had been carried out for 3 pressures to evaluate their impacts on the ecosystemservices identified previously for each of the landscape type.

Table C 1. Strength of connection between landscapes and ecosystem services ranging from less significant (+) to highly significant (+++)

Landscapes/Habitats

Ecosystem Services Forest Agriculture Grassland Water Settlement

Erosion control +++ + ++

Water flow +++ + ++

Biodiversity/habitat ++ + +++ ++

Food provision +++ +++

Recreation ++ ++ ++ +++ ++

Climate regulation +++ + ++

Pollination + +++ +

Sheep +++

Water quantity and quality +++ +++ ++ +++ +

Population (livelihood/culture) + +++


41

• Temperature increase: we found that climate regulation, water flow, food provision, habitat and water quality and quantity are most vulnerable services (Table C 2.a).

• Precipitation decrease: in the forest, the climate regulation and pollination are vulnerable to the less precipitation. We found that all of the services provided by the other ecosystems are vulnerable to this pressure. For example, less precipitation will influence the irrigation activities in the agriculture system and it has negative influence on the water services (Drinking water, recreation) (Table C 2.b).

• Extreme events increase: all the forest's services are vulnerable to this pressure, because of their high sensitivity and low adaptation capacity to the extreme events (Table C 2.c).

Climate regulation is the ecosystem service more vulnerable to climate change, and in overall, allthe services provided by the forest. However, it is important to point out that almost all the serv-ices considered in this study are vulnerable to climate change.

Table C 2. . The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land-use change provided by certain ecosystem types for: (a) agricultural intensification, (b) forest area increase and (c) decrease of pastoral grasslands.

If we consider the three pressures at the same time, forest and grassland services' are the most vul-nerable, creating feedbacks with services provided by other habitats.

C 2.2 Land-use change vulnerability assessmentFor this driver, we also identified three main pressures: intensification of agriculture, increaseforest area and decrease of pasture grassland.• Intensification of agriculture: this pressure influences mainly the forest's services which have

high exposure and sensitivity and have low adaptation capacity. It does also impact on the services provided by water. As a consequence of the feedback between the services, settlement can be highly vulnerable. In other words, due to the vulnerability of the services provided by the forest and water, population and recreation (settlement services) can be also affected. For example, intensification of agriculture can increase the use of pollutants bringing

Forests Agriculture Grassland Water Settlement

Pollin

atio

n

Recr

eatio

n

Shee

p

Hab

itat

Recr

eatio

n

Popu

latio

n

Recr

eatio

n

a. Agricultural intensificationExposure + + + + - - - - - + + -/+ -/+Sensitivity + + + + - - - - - + + -/+ -/+Adaptation - - - - - + + - - - - + +Vulnerability ++ ++ ++ ++ - - - - - ++ ++ -/+ -/+b. Increase of forested areaExposure + + + + + + + + + + + + -Sensitivity + - - + + + + + + + + + -Adaptation + - - + + + + + - - + + -Vulnerability - - - - - + + + ++ ++ + + -c. Decrease of pastural grasslandExposure + - - + + - - + + - - + -Sensitivity + - - + + - - + + - - + +Adaptation - + + - - - - - - - - + -Vulnerability ++ - + ++ ++ - - ++ ++ - - ++ -

Clim

ate

Regu

lati

on

Eros

ion

cont

rol

Wat

er

flow

Biod

iver

sity

/ Ha

bita

t

Food

pr

ovis

ion

Wat

er

quan

tity

and

qual

ity


42

a decrease of water quality and consequently, the services depending on these are vulnerable as is the case of settlement (Table C 3.a).

• Increase of forested area: it seems that this factor has not an impact on the most of the habitats, except the grass land habitat which is sensitive because there is less of food to the sheep (Table C 3.b)

• Decrease of pasture grassland: the climate regulation, biodiversity and the pollination are vulnerable to this pressure, and also, the services of grassland habitat are affected (Table C 3.c)

If we consider the three pressures at the same time, forest and grassland services' are the most vul-nerable, creating feedbacks with services provided by other habitats.

Table C 3. The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land-use change provided by certain ecosystem types for: (a) agricultural intensification, (b) forest area increase and (c) decrease of pastoral grasslands

C 3. Scenarios

C 3.1 Global Orchestration scenario Under the Global Orchestration scenario agricultural activities are very concentrated in theVerdon catchment. Most of this area is farmed intensively due to the technological development.This leads to more monoculture and water and soil eutrophication. Since industry in the area isdeveloped quite fast, impacts from industrial infrastructure can be also noticed in the regional nat-ural park. The extension of touristic activities in the area also cause certain problems related todisturbance of wildlife and input of nutrients into the natural systems. Generally, the intensive useof the land leads to a higher pollution of soil and water as well as it increases habitat fragmenta-tion. The higher nutrient input leads to a shift in floral species composition especially in grasslandareas naturally poor in nutrients. Since the sheep herds are increasing in number but are lessspread out in the area, the soil is more exposed to erosion at grazing sites while at other sites with-

Forests Agriculture Grassland Water SettlementPo

llinat

ion

Recr

eatio

n

Shee

p

Hab

itat

Recr

eatio

n

Popu

latio

n

Recr

eatio

n

a. Agricultural intensificationExposure + + + + - - - - - + + -/+ -/+Sensitivity + + + + - - - - - + + -/+ -/+Adaptation - - - - - + + - - - - + +Vulnerability ++ ++ ++ ++ - - - - - ++ ++ -/+ -/+b. Increase of forested areaExposure + + + + + + + + + + + + -Sensitivity + - - + + + + + + + + + -Adaptation + - - + + + + + - - + + -Vulnerability - - - - - + + + ++ ++ + + -c. Decrease of pastural grasslandExposure + - - + + - - + + - - + -Sensitivity + - - + + - - + + - - + +Adaptation - + + - - - - - - - - + -Vulnerability ++ - + ++ ++ - - ++ ++ - - ++ -

Clim

ate

Regu

lati

on

Eros

ion

cont

rol

Wat

er

flow

Biod

iver

sity

/ Ha

bita

t

Food

pr

ovis

ion

Wat

er

quan

tity

and

qual

ity


43

out sheep open landscape maintenance becomes very difficult. This increases also the likelihoodof uncontrollable fire events. In this scenario the Verdon catchment is facing a climate changeunder a business as usual scenario leading to lower precipitation throughout the year, moreextreme events and higher temperatures. This may cause a shift of the tree line resulting in a evenwider spread of forested area. While forest in the upper altitudes is increasing, bark beetles areprospering in the lower altitudes. This leads to a huge number of dying trees increasing again ero-sion at lower altitudes. Increasing likelihood of extreme events, such as floods and droughts, arethe reason why water regulation in the area will become one of the major issues for all sectors.Lower precipitation rates all over the year but more extreme events will result in an uncontrolla-ble run-off of water through the river again increasing the likelihood of flood events. This mightcause problems in water provision to the local people, to agriculture as well as for electricity gen-eration. Overall the proportion of open landscapes associated with the most charismatic and vul-nerable species will be reduced while the proportion of forested area is increasing. This will resultin a general loss of genetic, species and ecosystem biodiversity.

C 3.2 Adapting Mosaic scenario Under the Adapting Mosaic scenario agriculture is extensified while economic development ofthe region stays at the current level. The shift towards organic agriculture results in a lower inputof nutrients and lower pollution rates of soil and water. This is also accompanied by decreasingnumbers of tourists and their impact on the ecosystems. The decreasing number of sheep per herdbut the general increase of sheep herds results in a wider spread of sheep throughout the area.Therefore erosion becomes less in the area. Because of a wider spread of the sheep the landscapecan be kept open without using heavy machines in the forest again decreasing erosion. Since theopen landscape is of high importance for the provisioning of habitat to the grassland flora andfauna, which is characteristic for the region, we experience a general positive impact on biodiver-sity. Due to a moderate climate change scenario, precipitation decreases while temperatureincreases only on a intermediate level. Furthermore extreme events occur only rarely. Since tem-perature increase is only moderate and dead wood caused by storm events gets less abundant, barkbeetles are not threatening the smaller patches of forest which will be kept under this scenario.The generally lower input of nutrients, moderate climate change and decrease in erosion result ina better water flow control and higher water quality. Water shortages are still characteristic forthat area but are not becoming more abundant.

C 4. Recommendations

To maintain important ecosystem services and the compositional biodiversity, which is character-istic for the Verdon catchment, we suggest the following recommendations:• Subsidies, which are paid at the moment per sheep to the farmers, should be increased. But

this financial support should only be paid up to a certain number of sheep per herd in order to keep the flock size at a sustainable level.

• Although we suggest increasing the open landscape within the area, we propose to maintain certain small patches of mixed forest. This will be beneficial for erosion control and water management. Moreover it will limit the threat of bark beetles. In order to maintain the soil quality and limit its compaction we suggest avoiding the use of heavy machines in the forest.

• Since water availability is limited in the Verdon catchment area we recommend avoiding intensified agriculture in the area. Rather we suggest adopting organic farming strategies with


44

a limited use of fertilizers and pesticides. This will increase the regenerating ability of soil as well as water quality and flow control of the water body.

• To limit the negative impacts from tourism on the water bodies and on the catchment area we suggest the creation of buffer zones with limited access and restricted clearing.

• Generally we suggest the development of an integrated management plan for the region with participation of all sectors dependent on the ecosystem services provided by the park and its biodiversity.

C 5. ReferencesFritsch U, Schröter D (2009) PowerPoint-Presentations at the ALTER-Net summer school in

Peyresq. Available at: http://www.pik-potsdam.de/alter-net/ Kreiner D, Jolibert C (2009) ALTER-Net Summer School September 2009. Excursion to the

Verdon catchment: Friday 11th September 2009. Available at: http://www.pik-potsdam.de/infodesk/education/alter-net/2009/11.09.2009/summary_excursion_daniel_cathy

The Verdon regional natural Park. Press kit. Available at: http://www.parcduverdon.fr/docs/707-DP-angl.pdf

Part D

MASSIF: Tourism Sector

Photo: Daniel Kreiner

“Tourism” Working GroupEspen Dahl, Johanna Gleißner, Anne Holsten, Musa Mlambo,

Sofia Neto, Zlatko Petrin, Kristina Raab Tutor: Diana Reckien


46

Abstract

The main goal of this study was to estimate the vulnerability of the tourism sector in theVerdon catchment. The main drivers of change were identified and the sensitivity of this sectorto these changes assessed. Then we explored how to develop tourism sustainably safeguardinglocal livelihoods and biodiversity.

In any scenario, our study region is likely to face water shortages as the main problem in thefuture. Our analysis suggests that the present policy of "hors circuit, hors saison" probably willremain the key strategy for improving sustainability in the tourism sector. Furthermore, we re-commend strengthening the links between tourism and other sectors, especially cooperationwith agriculture.


47

Part D MASSIF: Tourism Sector

D 1. Introduction

Featuring Europe's largest canyon, the Verdon catchment area is situated in one of the mostpicturesque areas of the Alpes de Haute-Provence, attracting 1.5 million tourists each year.Among the main tourist attractions in the Verdon catchment are the Gorges du Verdon, fiveartificial reservoir lakes, and the extensive lavender fields on the Plateau de Valensole. Thetourism sector in the Verdon catchment is economically important, e.g. for employment (2.000permanent and 1.500 seasonal (mainly July and August) jobs; Présidy and Hauwuy 2004) andrevenue generation. Most tourists visit the area during July and August. Three out of five tour-ists are French, and half of these live in the region itself. The other tourists come mainly fromthe Germany, Netherlands and Belgium. For an introduction into the history of tourism in theVerdon catchment see Appendix D 1.

Along with the scenic nature including the gorge, cultural landscapes, water sports opportuni-ties and a relatively reliable sunny weather, the Verdon catchment offers breathtaking bird-watching opportunities, for instance for the canyon's vulture colony (Gyps fulvus, and thereintroduced Gypaetus barbatus). The main tourism activities in the Verdon catchment includewine and food tours, visiting farmers' markets, water sports (e.g. swimming, white-water sport,kayaking, canoeing, and other forms of boating, hydrospeeding or hot-dogging (similar towhite water rafting but in a smaller raft, see e.g. Blackmountain Activities Ltd. 2009 for fur-ther explanation), cycling and motor-biking, and downhill and cross-country skiing. For acomplete list of activities see Appendix D 2.

One of the main regional problems is water shortage, which can cause conflicts with electricitysuppliers (hydropower), local farmers, and local inhabitants. But seasonally high numbers oftourists, especially in the Gorges du Verdon, require that the hydrologic regime of the river tobe controlled. Abrupt changes in water levels due to the operation of hydroelectric power sta-tions can compromise conservation goals, related e.g. to freshwater diversity downstream orvulture breeding. Increased traffic on transit routes as well as on roads mainly used by resi-dents causes noise and pollution.

D 2. Methods

We followed the approach of a regional vulnerability assessment as outlined in the generalmethods chapter provided by the synthesis group (see overall introduction for further explana-tion) based on literature review and expert judgments. Important to note is that the (traditional)concept of vulnerability is applied in a wider sense here and does not only encompass the natu-ral environment, but also social processes and phenomena. This is an advancement of the con-cept and terminology recently developed and discussed in the scientific community (see, e.g.,Adger et al. 2004). The information gained from interviews with key stakeholders was incor-porated into the estimation of vulnerability of different tourism activities. For each activity weidentified the dependence on various ecosystem services (Appendix D 3.) and how these serv-ices are affected by tourism (Appendix D 4.). Vulnerability of the four main touristic activitieswas characterized by three crucial elements, i.e. i) exposure to drivers of change, ii) sensitivity,indicating the susceptibility to the respective driver; and iii) adaptive capacity. The analysiswas carried out for two scenarios, the Global Orchestration scenario (GOS) and the AdaptiveMosaic scenario (AMS) (for further information see scenario reports from the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment 2005). For an illustration of the possible future paths see Appendix D5.


48

D 3. Results

As most of the tourist activities relate to the landscapes' harmonic ensemble, a future change inland use was identified as a main driver of change in the region, followed by climate changeand economy (Figure D 1.). Additionally, the tourism activities most strongly affected by land-use change contribute to the largest proportion of revenues from the tourism sector. The foureconomically most important tourism activities are skiing, water sports, cycling / motor bikingand culinary tourism. In the following, we will focus on these four main tourism activities andthe three drivers mentioned.

Figure D 1. Main drivers of the 14 identified tourism activities in the Verdon catchment. The size of the circles represents the aggregated economic importance of the respective activities.

D 3.1 Development possibilities and vulnerability of skiing activitiesTwo main winter sport areas are located in the Verdon catchment: La Foux and Le Seignus,both in the Allos valley (Appendix D 6.). Winter tourism especially skiing is economicallyimportant in the Verdon catchment (Appendix D 2.), and ski areas in the Alps in general areexpected to be strongly affected by climate change (Abegg et al 2007).

The ski areas are particularly exposed to temperature rise influencing snow reliability (i.e. suf-ficient snow cover for over 100 days of skiing) depending on the altitude (sensitivity). Cur-rently, snow cover is naturally reliable at about 1.500 m in the Southern Alps. However, thisaltitude is likely to rise by 150 m for each degree of temperature rise. Hence, the lower rangesof the Verdon ski areas, at 1.500 m and 1.800 m, could be threatened by the expected exposurethat temperature rise represents. Both scenarios (GOS and AMS) suggest a global temperaturerise of 2°C by 2050. The impact of climate change is therefore considered to be high. Never-theless, the maximum altitudes of 2.400 m for La Foux and 2.675 m for Le Seignus suggestthat the system has some management options (adaptive capacity). Even for a relativelystrong warming scenario, some ski runs will remain in areas with reliable snow cover, wherewinter tourists would then aggregate. The system's overall vulnerability is therefore consid-ered to be relatively high.

Due to large energy consumption and high demand for water, snow machines do not representadequate adaptation options. An expansion of ski runs towards higher altitudes is often lim-ited by topographical features and small total surface areas at higher altitudes. Moreover,skiing at high altitudes might negatively affect sensitive mountain ecosystems. Apart from anoptimal management of the existing skiing infrastructure, adaptation options regarding thiswinter sport are strongly limited. A shift to activities demanding less snow, like sliding orcross-country skiing, however may constitute a viable option for the next years to decades.


49

D 3.2 Development possibilities and vulnerability of water tourism activitiesWater tourism activities (e.g. kayaking/canoeing, swimming, boating) are carried out mainly inthe reservoir lakes of the Verdon and in the Verdon river itself.

The Rhône and its tributary, the Verdon, are highly dependent on snow and glacier water. Gla-cier retreat and snowfall decrease in the past decades suggests that climate change affects theriver flow by decreasing water availability, especially in summer. Additionally, water use bythe agriculture, energy and industry sectors (EEA 2009), as well as an increase in evaporationof the lakes due to warming are expected to aggravate this flow situation. However, for bothscenarios, the climatic conditions ensuring a physiological comfort for humans in summer areexpected to improve (EEA 2008).

Given an annually occurring water shortage for the GOS, the exposure can be considered to bemedium. Under the AMS, however, with water shortages occurring only every few years andan integrated water management system, the exposure is reduced to a lower level.

A relatively high sensitivity of artificial dams towards changes in physical parameters andwater flow regulation (e.g. Moreno-Ostos et al. 2008; Goosseff et al. 2005) suggest a relativelyhigh impact of climatic changes on reservoirs for the GOS. This could affect water levels andwater quality (decrease in dilution of pollution, increase in algae due to higher water tempera-tures) negatively affecting water sport activities. For the AMS, the impact is considered to belower.

Water flow regulation is an important part of the adaptive capacity by ensuring sufficientwater levels in summer to maintain tourism activities. This management option is very limitedin the GOS.

The overall vulnerability of the water sport activities is estimated to be high for the GOS andmedium for the OMS. Adaptation by shifting water sport activities from summer to spring orautumn could reduce the vulnerability.

D 3.3 Development possibilities and vulnerability of motor biking andcycling Both motor biking and cycling are characterized by a direct dependence on infrastructure; i.e.roads for motor biking and cycling, trails for mountain biking. Socioeconomic changes repre-sent the main driver constituting the exposure these activities have to cope with.

Against the background of the GOS, the expansion of the tourism sector is likely to lead toincreased traffic, overcrowding and noise. The improved rural infrastructure also implies thespatial spread of tourism into remote regions distant from the large urban centres where tour-ists originate (Herbert et al 1982). This development reduces the attractiveness of the region(sensitivity). In contrast, under the AMS, the number of foreign and overall visitors is likely tobe much lower. In the long run, the degree of rural infrastructure will be reduced, althoughexisting roads can still be used for at least 50 years. Overall, traffic and overcrowding is sub-stantially lower.

We assume that the economic development via traffic volume and infrastructure has a noticea-ble impact on cycling/motor biking. Still, tourists interested in these activities have someadaptive capacity in seeking out less frequented roads or trails. In the AMS, bikers mighteven appreciate the reduced traffic and noise. In conclusion, the vulnerability is consideredcomparatively low and consequently proactive adaptation measures are less important.


50

D 3.4 Development possibilities and vulnerability of culinary tourismThe location and climate of the Verdon catchment facilitate easy access to natural resources(e.g. necessary for wine-growing) allowing for the production of high quality goods and food.In addition, frequent farmers' markets selling local products make the culinary tourism anattractive opportunity in the area.

Economic development is considered to be the main driver of change (exposure). Changes inthe agricultural practice strongly affect the quality of the products and the attributed and crop-related aesthetic value of the landscape influences the reputation of the region. Under the GOS,the range of local agricultural goods is expected to be limited due to changing conditions forproduction. Nevertheless, high quality wine, cheese and lavender can still be expected to beproduced locally, which increases the number of tourists visiting. Thus exposure under thisscenario is estimated to be medium. Under the AMS, the landscape is projected to shifttowards small scale farming systems with a large variety of local food products. The overallnumber of tourists visiting the region and their purchasing power will decrease; hence theexposure is also likely to be medium. Culinary tourism is very sensitive to changes in thenumber of tourists and the revenues generated, which depends on the reputation of the regionand the quality of the products. Thus, under the GOS, the impact is estimated to be low,whereas under the AMS the impact is likely to be larger. The adaptive capacity could belarger under the GOS since more liberal trade conditions allow for a better exchange of prod-ucts and technology, whereas under the AMS, culinary tourism would largely depend on thelocal infrastructure. Overall, the vulnerability of culinary tourism to the described changes ishigher under the AMS than under the GOS.

Possible adaptation options especially under the GOS could entail a stronger emphasis onmarketing of the region. Developing, e.g., a regional agricultural label could increase the visi-bility of the catchment's touristic activities. Under both scenarios, offering culinary coursesand seminars would strengthen the service sector.

D 3.5 Vulnerability summarySkiing and water sport activities constitute the most vulnerable activities under both futurescenar-ios (Figure D 2.). Cycling/ motor biking are considered to be least vulnerable.

Figure D 2. Vulnerability of the four main tourism activities under the Global Orchestration (GO) and Adaptive Mosaic (AM) scenario.


51

D 3.6 Overall adaptation options for the tourism sectorIn addition to adaptation measures for the individual tourism activities, we suggest the follow-ing general strategies to ensure sustainable tourism in the Verdon catchment, applicable forboth scenarios, Global Orchestration and Adaptive Mosaic:

1. Continuing the "hors circuit, hors saison"-programme. • Diverting tourism flow off the main circuits • Shifting tourism flows to the off-season by a differentiated pricing system and

an improved communication between stakeholders of education and tourism. Furthermore, a decentralized holiday schedule prolonging the national holiday season of the schools could be discussed.

2. Strengthening cooperation between agriculture and tourism, e.g. by agreementsregarding postponed lavender harvest to ensure a longer blooming period, highlyattractive to tourists.

3. Strengthening the visibility of the region by a coherent tourism concept.

4. Strengthening the links between the various tourism activities and other sectors.

D 4. Discussion and conclusion

Irrespective of the scenario considered, the main problems of the region in the future arerelated to water shortages, especially during the peak season when water consumption by tour-ists is highest. The GOS suggests a severe impact on both quantity and quality of water leadingto increased com-petition for this resource between tourists and local residents, especiallyfarmers. Under the AMS, the effect will be lower due to regionalized or even catchment-basedpolicies and management strategies.

Complete abolishment of subsidies under the GOS will strongly affect land use, as shepherdsand farmers are likely to be forced to abandon first their activity and ultimately their land.

Most of the tourism activities in the region depend to a certain degree and impact on biodiver-sity. Under the GOS the associated negative impacts will be more extreme than under the AMS(Table D 1.).

Table D 1. : Effect on biodiversity by changes of the four analyzed tourism activities under the GO and AM scenario


52

Strengthening cooperation is a key prerequisite for coping with future challenges in a sustain-able and integrated manner. For instance, to avoid conflicts arising from competition for water,common strategies together with the agricultural sectors need to be developed.

In the context of the vulnerability analysis, culinary tourism and cycling in particular should bestrengthened in the region, inter alia via extending the season and by offering additional activi-ties. Our results suggest a large potential to expand this economically vital sector in this area.

Ultimately, the level of vulnerability depends on the selected scenario. We therefore recom-mend continuing the study as well as monitoring the implementation of the presented results.

D 5. References

Abegg B, Jetté-Nantel S, Crick F, de Montfalcon A (2007) Climate change in the EuropeanAlps: adapting winter tourism and natural hazards management. Agrawala S (edt)OECD Paris.

Adger WN, Brooks N, Bentham G, Agnew M, Eriksen S (2004) New indicators ofvulnerability and adaptive capacity. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research,School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia. Technical Report 7.

Black Mountain Activities Ltd. (2009) Available at: http://www.blackmountain.co.uk/whitewater/hot%20dogging.htm [as of October 24 2009]

EEA (2008) Impact on Europe´s changing climate - 2008 indicator based assessment. JointEEA-JRC-WHO report.

EEA (2009) Regional climate change and adaptation - The Alps facing the challenge ofchanging water resources. EEA Technical Report, No. 9.

Goosseff NM, Strzepek K, Chapra CS (2005) Modelling the potential effects of climate changeon water temperature downstream of a shallow reservoir, lower Madison River. Mt.Climatic Change 68:331-353.

Dilly O, Rogaß C, Doerrie C, Schneider BU, Hüttl RF, Hallenbarter D, Kräuchi N, ImrichováZ, Kenderessy P, Oszlányi J, Putzhuber F, Hasenauer H, Oja T, Kull A, Mander Ü,Moncada S, Camilleri M, Stuczynski T, Korzeniowska R, Siebielec G., Koza P,Lopatka A, Pudelko R, Kowalik M (2007) Sustainability issues in European sensitiveareas. Annex 4: European islands SENSOR Project Deliverable Report 6.1.1, pp57.

Kariel HG, Kariel PE (1982) Socio-cultural impacts of tourism: an example from the AustrianAlps. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography 64(1):1-16.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being:Synthesis report. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.

Moreno-Ostos E, Marcé R, Ordoñez J, Dolz J, Armengol J (2008) Hydraulic managementdrives heat budgets and temperature trends in a Mediterranean reservoir. Internat.Rev. Hydrobiol. 93:131-147.

Office de Tourisme du Val d'Allos (2009) Available at: http://www.valdallos.com [as ofOctober 24 2009]


53

Présidy J, Hauwuy E (2004) Schéma du tourisme durable du Parc naturel régional du Verdon.Parc naturel régional du Verdon: Rapport final, Décembre 2004.

Rossi G, Parolo G, Ulian T (2009) Human trampling as a threat factor for the conservation ofperipheral plant populations. Plant Biosystems 143(1):104-113.


54

Appendix D 1. History of tourism in the Verdon catchment

Before dams were built for flow regulation, crossing the Gorges du Verdon was almost impos-sible. Hence, the establishment of tourism in the region was slow. In 1928, the first hiking trailsand scenic viewpoints were established by the Touring Club de France. In 1973, the Route desCrêtes was opened to channel increasing numbers of visitors. The construction of the dams andsubsequent flooding began in the 1950s, and ended with fifth and last artificial lake in 1974.Dam construction served a triple purpose then: the generation of electricity, the provision ofdrinking water reservoirs for Marseille and the coastal areas and the design/engineering oftouristically attractive lakes. Today, different lakes fulfil different purposes to avoid conflictsbetween power generation and the generation of incomes from tourism. Water sports thusadded to the already broad range of typical touristic activities in the Verdon catchment. Muchlater, in 1997, an area of 177.000 ha was protected as Parc Naturel Régional. During the lastdecades, tourism has substantially increased, as reflected in the construction of water reser-voirs and ski lifts.


55

Appendix D 2. Dependence of touristic activities on different factors

Dependence of the various touristic activities on natural, physical, and human factors, financialimportance of the touristic activity, its seasonality, threats to biodiversity, and dependence onbiodiversity. The touristic activities that are economically most important are depicted in boldface.

Key: a wine and food tours, farmers' markets;b swimming, white-water sports, kayaking and other forms of boating; cdownhill and cross-country; d individual and organized, i.e. guided tours; e (fly-)fishing and hunting; f rock climbing, parachuting, gliding, paragliding (in 1993, the Verdon catchment provided the venue for the world championship in paragliding in St André les Alpes); g cultural and natural; h birds, mammals, plants, and rocks; i 1: low, 2: medium, 3: high; k I: international, N: national, R: regional; l Sp: spring, Su: summer, Au: autumn, Wi: winter; m 0: no effect, -: negative effect (blue), +: positive effect (green).

Touristic activity Dep

ende

nce

on

nat

ural

fact

ors:

land

scap

e,

spec

iesi

Dep

ende

nce

on p

hysi

cal

fact

ors:

sno

w, r

ocks

i

Dep

ende

nce

on

hum

an fa

ctor

s:

infr

astr

uctu

re,

cult

ure

i

Prov

enan

ce o

f par

tici

pan

tsk

Fina

ncia

l im

port

ance

of a

ctiv

ityi

Seas

onal

ityl

Thre

at t

o bi

odiv

ersi

tym

Dep

ende

nce

on

biod

iver

sity

Culinary tourisma 2 2 3 I 3 Sp, Su, Au, Wi

0 2

Water sportsb 2 3 1 I 3 Sp, Su,

Au

0 2

Motor-biking & cycling 3 2 1 I 3 Sp, Su,

Au

0 1

Skiingc 3 3 2 I 2 Wi - 1

Hikingd 3 1 1 I 2

Sp, Su,

Au 0 2

Wildlife harvestinge 3 3 1 R 2

Sp, Su, Au

- 3

Adventure tourismf 2 3 1 I 2

Sp, Su,

Au 0 1

Sight-seeingg 3 3 3 I 2

Sp, Su,

Au, Wi + 3

Nature watchingh 3 3 1 N 2

Sp, Su, Au, Wi

+ 3

Farm stays 2 2 3 I 2

Sp, Su,

Au, Wi 0 3

Horse riding 3 1 1 N 1

Sp, Su,

Au 0 2

Golfing 1 3 3 R 1

Sp, Su, Au

- 1


56

Appendix D 3. Dependence of the four main touristic activities on ecosystemservices and effects of the touristic activities on ecosystem services.

Key: green colour indicates the ecosystem service(s) the each activity relies on, red colour the activities' potential effect on the respective ecosystem service;a wine and food tours, farmers' markets;b swimming, white-water sports, kayaking and other forms of boating; c downhill and cross-country; d PrS: provisioning services, CuS: cultural services, SuS: Supportive services, ReS: regulating services; e the effects on biodiversity are unclear as regulating water flow may remediate the negative effects of water shortage; f nutrient regime altered by nutrients released from artificial snow; 1 Rossi et al. 2009. Note that water shortage due to increased water consumption by high numbers of tourists and increased traffic resulting in pollution, habitat fragmentation due to road construction, and thus the general deterioration of untouched areas for rec-reation are overarching problems causing the degradation of provisioning and cultural ecosystem services (Herbert et al 1982, Dilly et al 2007).

Touristic activity Ecosystem servicesd


Cultural services

Supportive services

Regulationg services

Culinary tourisma PrS, CuS, ReS

[Primary

production, food production,

water provision]

water shortage

[Education,

recreation, aesthetics]

overcrowding,

traffic

[Water quality]

Pollution

Water sportsb PrS, CuS, SuS,

ReS

[Primary

production, food

production, water provision]

flow regulation,

water shortage, water qualitye

[Recreation, aesthetics]

overcrowding,

traffic

Nutrient cycling, sedimentation,

erosion,

eutrophication

[Water quality, flow regulation]

Pollution

Motor-biking &

cycling PrS, CuS, ReS 1

[Primary

production, food production,

water provision]

water shortage, pollution


overcrowding,

traffic, noise

[Erosion control] Erosion,

trampling, soil

compaction

Skiingc PrS, CuS, SuS,

ReS

[Primary production, food

production,

water provision] water shortage


overcrowding,

traffic infrastructure

[Provision of

habitat]

fragmentation, deforestation,

landslides,

avalanches [Nutrient cycling]

changed nutrient

regimef

[Erosion control]

Erosion,

trampling, soil compaction


57

Appendix D 4. Changes in tourism dependent ecosystem services under theGO and AM scenario

(upwards directed arrows indicate positive changes, downwards directed arrows negativechanges and horizontal arrows no changes)


58

Appendix D 5. Illustration of the two scenarios [top] Global Orchestration(GO) and [bottom] Adaptive Mosaic (AM)


59

Appendix D 6. Main characteristics of the ski areas in the Allos valley(Office de Tourisme du Val d'Allos, 2009)

La Foux Le Seignus Altitude range 1500-2400 m

1800 -2675 m

Number of ski lifts 51 11 Number of Ski runs 80 25 Length of ski runs 180 km no data Opening time December 12th - April 18th (127 days) December 12th - April 5th (114 days)

Mapping Regional Vulnerability in the Southern Alps ... · PDF fileEvaluating Trends and...

Documents

Transcript of Mapping Regional Vulnerability in the Southern Alps ... · PDF fileEvaluating Trends and...