Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Chinese Version)


EU Natura 2000 protected area network, biodiversity conservation, protected areas, regional governance

Document Type

Modernizing National Park Governance System


The EU Natura 2000 protected area network, covering nearly 19% of the land and 10% of the sea in the EU, has played an important role in protecting biodiversity and enhancing regional socio-economic well-being, and is regarded as the most successful protected area network in the world. Its successful experience is mainly reflected in five aspects. (1) The adoption of regional biodiversity conservation legislation and the promotion of compliance with the law by member countries to promote the construction of the protected area network. (2) The establishment of a decision-making and implementation mechanism that combines the EU resolution process and the participation of multiple subjects in the whole process, which enhances the scientificity of decision-making and the enthusiasm of all relevant subjects to participate. (3) The promoting strategic planning based on a holistic perspective to improve the connectivity and rational spatial layout of the protected area network. (4) The coordinating development goals, developing multi-channel funding sources, and promoting the formulation of scientific management plans for protected areas with a funding application and assessment system. And (5) the recording and disclosing protected area site data to help scientific research and management model innovation. These experiences have important implications for the selection of global biodiversity cooperative governance paths and models, China’s leadership in promoting the formulation of global biodiversity governance strategies and policies, and the construction and optimization of China’s protected areas system with national parks as the mainstay.

First page


Last Page





Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences


1 Johnson C N, Balmford A, Brook B W, et al. Biodiversity losses and conservation responses in the Anthropocene. Science, 2017, 356:270-274.

2 Shepherd E, Milner - Gulland E J, Knight A T, et al. Status and trends in global ecosystem services and natural capital:Assessing progress toward Aichi Biodiversity Target 14.

3 Dudley N. Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland:IUCN, 2008.

4 Watson J E M, Dudley N, Segan D B, et al. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature, 2014, 515:67-73.

5 Opermanis O, MacSharry B, Aunins A, et al. Connectedness and connectivity of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas across country borders in the European Union. Biological Conservation, 2012, 153:227-238.

6 Opermanis O, MacSharry B, Evans D, et al. Is the connectivity of the Natura 2000 network better across internal or external administrative borders?. Biological Conservation, 2013, 166:170-174

7 Muller A, Schneider U A, Jantke K. Evaluating and expanding the European Union's protected-area network toward potential post-2020 coverage targets. Conservation Biology, 2020, 34(3):654-665.

8 European Environment Agency. State of Nature in the EU:Results from Reporting under the Nature Directives 2013-2018. Copenhagen:European Environment Agency, 2020.

9 Zisenis M. Is the Natura 2000 network of the European Union the key land use policy tool for preserving Europe's biodiversity heritage?. Land Use Policy, 2017, 69:408-416.

10 Schweitzer J P, Mutafoglu K, Brink T P, et al. The Health and Social Benefits of Nature and Biodiversity Protection:Annex[1]:20 Cases. London, Brussels:European Commission, Institute for European Environmental Policy, 2016.

11 Mitchell R J, Richardson E A, Shortt N K, et al. Neighborhood environments and socioeconomic inequalities in mental well-being. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2015, 49(1):80-84.

12 Gantioler S, Rayment M, Brink T P, et al. The costs and socio-economic benefits associated with the Natura 2000 network. International Journal of Sustainable Society, 2014, 6(1-2):135-157.

13 Lovell R, Wheeler B W, Higgins S L, et al. A systematic review of the health and well-being benefits of biodiverse environments. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 2014, 17(1):1-20.

14 Brink T P, Badura T, Bassi S, et al. Estimating the overall economic value of the benefits provided by the Natura 2000 network. Brussels:Institute for European Environmental Policy/GHK/Ecologic, 2011.

15 Environment Directorate-General (European Commission). The Economic benefits of the Natura 2000 Network:Synthesis Report. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union, 2013.

16 Wolch J R, Byrne J, Newell J P. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice:The challenge of making cities'just green enough'. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014, 125:234-244.

17 Strzelecka M, Rechciński M, Tusznio J, et al. Environmental justice in Natura 2000 conservation conflicts:The case for resident empowerment. Land Use Policy, 2021, 107:105494.

18 Paloniemi R, Apostolopoulou E, Cent J, et al. Public participation and environmental justice in biodiversity governance in Finland, Greece, Poland and the UK. Environmental Policy and Governance, 2015, 25(5):330-342.

19 Kettunen M, Torkler P, Rayment M. Financing Natura 2000 Guidance Handbook-Part I:EU Funding Opportunities in 2014-2020. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union, 2014.

20 Medarova-Bergstrom K, Kettunen M, Illes A, et al. Tracking Biodiversity Expenditure in the EU Budget, Part II-Fund Specific Guidance Documents, Final Report. Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union, 2015.

21 Barnes M D, Glew L, Wyborn C, et al. Prevent perverse outcomes from global protected area policy. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 2018, 2(5):759-762.

22 Kovács E, Kelemen E, Kiss G, et al. Evaluation of participatory planning:Lessons from Hungarian Natura 2000 management planning processes. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 204:540-550.

23 Sitzia T, Campagnaro T, Grigolato S. Ecological risk and accessibility analysis to assess the impact of roads under Habitats Directive. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2016, 59(12):2251-2271.

24 Arlidge W, Bull J, Addison P, et al. A global mitigation hierarchy for nature conservation. BioScience, 2018, 68(5):336-347.

25 Gilbert N. Funding battles stymie ambitious plan to protect global biodiversity. Nature, 2022, doi:10.1038/d41586-022-00916-8.

26 蔡晓梅,苏杨,吴必虎,等.生态文明建设背景下中国自然保护地发展的理论思考与创新实践.自然资源学报, 2023, 38(4):839-861. Cai X M, Su Y, Wu B H, et al. Theoretical debates and innovative practices of the development of China's nature protected area under the background of ecological civilization construction. Journal of Natural Resources, 2023, 38(4):839-861.(in Chinese)

27 黄宝荣,马永欢,黄凯,等.推动以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系改革的思考.中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(12):1342-1351. Huang B R, Ma Y H, Huang K, et al. Strategic approach on promoting reform of China's natural protected areas system with national parks as backbone. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018, 33(12):1342-1351.(in Chinese)

28 欧阳志云,杜傲,徐卫华.中国自然保护地体系分类研究.生态学报, 2020, 40(20):7207-7215. Ouyang Z Y, Du A, Xu W H, Research on China's protected area system classification. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2020, 40(20):7207-7215.(in Chinese)

29 魏辅文,平晓鸽,胡义波,等.中国生物多样性保护取得的主要成绩、面临的挑战与对策建议.中国科学院院刊, 2021, 36(4):375-383. Wei F W, Ping X G, Hu Y B, et al. Main achievements, challenges, and recommendations of biodiversity conservation in China. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2021, 36(4):375-383.(in Chinese)

30 李云,蔡芳,孙鸿雁,等.国家公园大数据平台构建的思考.林业建设, 2019,(2):10-15. Li Y, Cai F, Sun H Y, et al. Thoughts on the construction of national park big data platform. Forestry Construction. 2019,(2):10-15.(in Chinese)

31 马克平,朱敏,纪力强,等.中国生物多样性大数据平台建设.中国科学院院刊, 2018, 33(8):838-845. Ma K P, Zhu M, Ji L Q, et al. Establishing China infrastructure for big biodiversity data. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2018, 33(8):838-845.(in Chinese)