Life-SMIsLE-Bio proposal

Ήταν άνοιξη του 2013 …

… όταν η Δήμαρχος Τήλου Μαρία Καμμά πρότεινε στο CISD να αναλάβει την σύνταξη και κατάθεση πρότασης στο πρόγραμμα Life+ της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, ώστε να εδραιωθούν και επεκταθούν τα επιτεύγματα προηγούμενου -ήδη ολοκληρωμένου- προγράμματος για τα οποία το νησί βραβεύθηκε. Η ανταπόκριση υπήρξε άμεση. Το CISD ταχύτατα επεξεργάσθηκε την αρχική ιδέα και βασισμένο στους άξονες του Life+ διαμόρφωσε την ιδέα της νέας πρότασης στο πνεύμα της Προστασίας της Βιοποικιλότητας μέσα από την Επιχειρηματικότητα των Νησιωτών, διευρύνοντας το πεδίο σε ομάδα μικρών νησιών του Νότιου Αιγαίου που έχουν συναφή χαρακτηριστικά και προβλήματα! Έτσι, οργανώθηκε Θεματική Επιτροπή του CISD για την σύνταξη της πρότασης, προσκλήθηκαν καθηγητές του Πανεπιστημίου Αιγαίου αλλά και το Ελληνικό Κέντρο Θαλασσίων Ερευνών να συμμετέχουν με την επιστημονική τους δυναμική, καθώς και οι Δήμαρχοι της Νισύρου, της Σύμης και της Χάλκης που παρέστησαν και αυτοί στην πρώτη σύσκεψη με την Περιφέρεια Νοτίου Αιγαίου, ο αρμόδιος Αντιπεριφερειάρχης της οποίας αγκάλιασε και στήριξε την ιδέα, μαζί με τις σχετικές υπηρεσίες. Ένας σκληρός αγώνας δρόμου άρχισε, ώστε να ολοκληρωθεί η πρόταση μέσα στο ελάχιστο χρονικό διάστημα των δύο μηνών μέχρι την προθεσμία υποβολής. Οι γνώσεις, η εμπειρία και η καλή οργάνωση δεν έφθαναν για την επίτευξη του χρονικού στόχου, καθώς απαιτείτο συνεχής παραγωγική απασχόληση, πράγμα που δεν υπήρξε εφικτό για πολλούς από τους συνεργάτες αλλά και πολλά υποσχόμενα μέλη του CISD. Έτσι, παρά το γεγονός ότι ήδη είχε προχωρήσει η αρχική σύνταξη, με απογοήτευση αλλά ρεαλιστική αντιμετώπιση αποφασίσθηκε η πρόταση να υποβληθεί στην επόμενη προκήρυξη του Life. Το CISD δεν επαναπαύθηκε σε αναμονή της νέας προκήρυξης …

Συνέχισε την επεξεργασία της ιδέας σε βάθος, συνεργάστηκε συστηματικά με το Πανεπιστήμιο Αιγαίου και το ΕΛΚΕΘΕ, ανέπτυξε την συνεργασία με τις υπηρεσίες της Περιφέρειας Νοτίου Αιγαίου, συζήτησε επανειλημμένα με τους Δημάρχους των Νησιών, με αρμόδιους Ευρωβουλευτές διαφόρων Κρατών Μελών και συναντήθηκε με τα αρμόδια όργανα της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής στις Βρυξέλλες, ενώ το Ελληνικό Δίκτυο Μικρών Νησιών προστέθηκε σαν νέος πολύτιμος συνεργάτης … και με το άνοιγμα της προκήρυξης του νέου Life 2014-20 άρχισε η εντατική παραγωγή … Οι δυσκολίες υπήρξαν, βέβαια, αναπόφευκτες – δυσκολίες μικρές, μεγάλες, αναπάντεχες – δυσκολίες και προβλήματα που έπρεπε να αντιμετωπισθούν με αμεσότητα, νηφαλιότητα και αποτελεσματικότητα … γιατί η προθεσμία πλησίαζε ολοταχώς … Η μοναδική απογοήτευση που είχαμε -οι διαχειριστές της συνολικής προσπάθειας- προερχόταν από την συνειδητή αδράνεια κάποιων υπηρεσιών αλλά και κάποιων θεσμικών να λειτουργήσουν εποικοδομητικά όπως τουλάχιστον αναμενόταν ή είχε διατυπωθεί – απογοήτευση που κάθε φορά καλόπιστα ξεπερνούσαμε, δικαιολογώντας τα αδικαιολόγητα, στο όνομα της «κρίσης» αλλά και άλλων συγκυριών. Ωστόσο, και μόνο η γνώση του σημαντικού οφέλους που θα προκύψει -αν υλοποιηθούν αυτά που σχεδιάζαμε- για τα υπέροχα αλλά παραμελημένα μικρά νησιά του Αιγαίου, για τη μοναδική βιοποικιλότητα που φιλοξενούν αλλά και για την νησιωτική κοινωνία που διαχρονικά χειμάζεται, μας έδινε τεράστια δύναμη και απίστευτο κουράγιο… Έτσι, έχοντας συγκεντρώσει όλες τις εξαιρετικές επιστημονικές και άλλες εργασίες των συνεργατών, εργασίες που συνεχώς εμπλουτιζόντουσαν, επί δύο μήνες το CISD συνέθεσε και ολοκλήρωσε μια σημαντική, ολοκληρωμένη πρόταση – αυτή που με συνεχή ξενύχτια και αντιξοότητες της τελευταίας στιγμής υποβάλαμε εμπρόθεσμα ! … με ένα πλατύ χαμόγελο, λοιπόν, σας παρουσιάζουμε την πρόταση που έχει την χαρακτηριστική κωδική ονομασία

SMIsLE – Bio (Small Islands Entrepreneurship for Biodiversity)

… και πλήρη τίτλο …

Business-Based Biodiversity Strategy for South Aegean Small Islands: Concrete actions in Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos

Η πρόταση αυτή αποτελεί προϊόν εργασίας σπουδαίων συνεργατών, τους οποίους (με αλφαβητική σειρά) ευχαριστούμε για την πολύτιμη συνδρομή τους αλλά και για το εξαιρετικό πνεύμα μέσα στο οποίο εξελίχθηκε η συνεργασία μας: Βερβέρη Καλπακίδη Καπίρη Κεχαγιόγλου Κίζο Μαραβέλια Παναγιωτίδη Σιούλα Σπιλάνη Φωκά-Corsini Χασιώτη Χατήρη

Μπάμπη Δαμιανό Κώστα Λευτέρη Θανάση Χρήστο Πάνο Ανδρέα Γιάννη Μαρία Θωμά Γιώργο

CISD CISD ΕΛΚΕΘΕ ΕΔΜΝ Παν. Αιγαίου ΕΛΚΕΘΕ ΕΛΚΕΘΕ ΕΛΚΕΘΕ Παν. Αιγαίου ΕΛΚΕΘΕ Παν. Αιγαίου ΕΛΚΕΘΕ

PhD Environmental Technology MSc Environmental Planner & Mgmt Senior Researcher Πρόεδρο Associate Professor Research Director Research Director Research Director Associate Professor Senior Scientist Assistant Professor Senior Scientist

Θα θέλαμε επίσης να ευχαριστήσουμε: o τους Δημάρχους · Χριστοφή Κορωναίο, του Δήμου Νισύρου, καθηγητή ΕΜΠ · Λευτέρη Παπακαλοδούκα, του Δήμου Σύμης · Μιχάλη Πατρό, του Δήμου Χάλκης για την εξαιρετική συνεργασία τους παρά τις συγκυριακές αντιξοότητες, o τον Αντώνη Χατζηιωάννου, τέως Αντιπεριφερειάρχη της ΠΝΑι, που με θέρμη αγκάλιασε και συχνά ενέπνευσε με τις προτάσεις του την εργασία μας, o τον Γιάννη Πουλή, Διευθυντή Αγροτικής Οικονομίας και Κτηνιατρικής της ΠΝΑι, που οι γνώσεις και εμπειρία του φώτισαν πολλές -άγνωστες για μας- πτυχές των τοπικών παραμέτρων που επηρεάζουν την πρόταση, Επίσης ευχαριστούμε: o την Νάντια Γιαννακοπούλου, Γενική Γραμματέα ΥΠΕΚΑ, μαζί με τον Εθνικό Εκπρόσωπο του LIFE Γιώργο Πρωτόπαπα o τον Σπύρο Σπυρίδωνος, Γενικό Γραμματέα της Αποκεντρωμένης Διοίκησης Αιγαίου, o τον Γιώργο Χατζημάρκο, Περιφερειάρχη Νοτίου Αιγαίου και o τον καθηγητή Γρηγόρη Τσάλτα, Πρύτανη του Παντείου Πανεπιστημίου και Διευθυντή του Ευρωπαϊκού Κέντρου Περιβαλλοντικής Έρευνας και Κατάρτισης, τ. Υπουργό ΠΕΚΑ, για την κάλυψη της πρότασης με σχετικές Δηλώσεις Υποστήριξης Ευχαριστούμε τον Γιάννη Ιωαννίδη, Πρόεδρο του Πάρκου Τήλου, που στήριξε με την εμπιστοσύνη του τη διαχείριση των απαιτούμενων διαδικασιών.

Ξεχωριστές ευχαριστίες αποδίδουμε στη Δήμαρχο Τήλου Μαρία Καμμά, όχι μόνο για την αρχική πρόκληση της -που υπήρξε η αφορμή να δημιουργηθεί αυτή η πρόταση- αλλά και για την ηθική στήριξή της σε όλη την δύσκολη διαδρομή – την διαδρομή που ξεκινήσαμε εμπνευσμένοι από τους συνεχείς και σκληρούς αγώνες της για καλύτερες μέρες του Περιβάλλοντος, της Κοινωνίας και της Οικονομίας της μικρής αλλά υπέροχης Τήλου. Ως Επιτελικός Σύμβουλος του CISD, επιθυμώ να ευχαριστήσω όσα μέλη και εταίρους μας ασχολήθηκαν -έστω και συμβουλευτικά- στις διάφορες φάσεις της εργασίας αυτής. … και βέβαια, οφείλω να διατυπώσω τις ιδιαίτερες προσωπικές ευχαριστίες μου στην Πρόεδρο του CISD Μαργαρίτα Καραβασίλη, χωρίς την ευαισθησία, την έμπνευση, την γνώση, την σφαιρική αντίληψη, το πείσμα αλλά και την ακάματη εργασία της δεν θα είχα την σπουδαία ικανοποίηση να συνυπογράφω αυτή την σημαντική πρόταση για τα νησιά του Αιγαίου, της οποίας είναι η κεντρική δημιουργός. Ελπίζοντας στην υλοποίηση όλων όσων προτείνονται -με την ευχή της έγκρισης της πρότασηςσας καλούμε να μπείτε στον πειρασμό της ανάγνωσής της.

Αθήνα, 24 Οκτωβρίου 2014

Περικλής Σαχίνης Επιτελικός Σύμβουλος CISD

LIFE Nature and Biodiversity TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part A – administrative information

Page 1 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022

LIFE 2014

FOR ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE Nature and Biodiversity project application Language of the proposal: English (en) Project title: Business-Based Biodiversity Strategy for South Aegean Small Islands: Concrete actions in Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos Project acronym: LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio The project will be implemented in the following Member State(s) and Region(s) or other countries: Greece Notio Aigaio Expected start date:

16/07/2015

Expected end date: 31/12/2019

LIST OF BENEFICIARIES Name of the coordinating beneficiary: TILOS PARK ASSOCIATION Name Name Name Name Name Name Name

of of of of of of of

the the the the the the the

associated associated associated associated associated associated associated

beneficiary: beneficiary: beneficiary: beneficiary: beneficiary: beneficiary: beneficiary:

Citizens' Inspectorate for Sustainable Develipment HELLENIC CENTER OF MARINE RESEARCH Hellenic Small Islands Network MUNICIPALITY OF NISYROS MUNICIPALITY OF SYMI MUNICIPALITY OF TILOS University of the Aegean-Research Unit

LIST OF CO-FINANCERS PROJECT BUDGET AND REQUESTED EU FUNDING Total project budget:

2,514,480 Euro

Total eligible project budget:

2,502,280 Euro

EU financial contribution requested:

1,495,762 Euro

SECTOR Biodiversity

Page 2 of 296

(= 59.78%

of total eligible budget)

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part B - technical summary and overall context of the project

Page 27 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

LIFE 2014 – 2020 Natura and Biodiversity TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part B – technical summary and overall context of the project

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

2

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

Legal information of the Coordinating Beneficiary

TPA Tilos Park Association Tilos Park Association (TPA) is a Private Non-Profit Organization established in October 5, 2003 with environmental conservation aims, including the establishment of Tilos Natural Park.

An international assembly of Tilos residents, scientists, representatives of the Local Authority, University and Research Institutes and Organizations, as well as global environmental organizations in the Livadia community of Tilos decided to create a non-profit association, the Tilos Park Association, aiming to the protection, maintenance and promotion of the natural and cultural environment of the island of Tilos.

Since 2005, local stakeholders have participated as volunteers in site management on behalf of the TPA and LIFE Nature project in (1) rescuing, feeding injured birds at the ARC; (2) island security patrols (fire watch, illegal activity reporting, fauna rescue); (3) accompanying visiting biology student classes in island biodiversity studies; (4) reporting year round island bird, reptile and other fauna sightings to TPA and EU Tilos LIFE Nature ornithologist; (5) clearing/cleaning walking paths after winter storms.

Advantages: Stakeholder volunteers have commenced the development of eco-tourism employment as local guides in conjunction with the Tilos Park. The secondary benefits include the education of and heightened awareness by volunteers’ family/friends of the island SPA’s natural resources and resulting benefits of nature conservation.

In 2009, Tilos was awarded with the EuroNatur Award for Environmental Excellence, paying tribute to the long term effort of the locals to protect the island’s nature in general and its great diversity of birds’ species in particular.

Tilos Park operation is based on volunteering. The Municipality of Tilos is the main supporter as TPA is the main tool for the promotion of the island's biodiversity and tourism interests. This support extends even to the provision of staff during the high-season tourism period.

3

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

Legal information of the Associated Beneficiaries

Nisyros The Municipality of Nisyros The Municipality of Nisyros is the second level local Government Administration – called Local Authority – and comprises of an elected Council and its Chairman (Mayor). It is a part of Region of South Aegean, Prefecture of the Dodecanese, Province of Kos. Several other islets are found in the direct vicinity of Nisyros, the largest of which is Gyali. The Municipality of Nisyros includes Gyalí (pop. 21) as well as uninhabited Pacheiá, Pergoússa, Kandelioússa, Ágios Antónios, and Stroggýli. It has a total land area of 50.055 km2 (19.326 sq. mi) and a total population of 1,008 inhabitants.

Nisyros can afford and must promptly proceed with a high quality tourism development plan mainly by attracting alternative tourism (of nature-loving, geological, archaeological and medicinal type).

Furthermore, actions must be initiated to reinvigorate farming, both in its traditional form as well as through modern production methods (greenhouses, for instance) to prevent unilateral economic development and to support high quality tourism. It is also important to institutionalize incentives for cattle breeders and to enforce repressive measures in order to radically eliminate the damage caused by uncontrolled goat and pig grazing. Utilization of renewable energy sources is an unavoidable prospect for Nisyros, as there is plenty of sun, wind and - most important - geothermy, capable of providing energy independence, low-cost energy and abundant, economic supply of potable water to the island through desalination.

Europa Nostra announced their decision in 2012 to award officials of Nisyros for their significant work on preserving the ancient walls of Nisyros. According to the European conservation movement, islanders managed to turn the ancient city into Nisyros’ most important sightseeing. This distinction will offer no financial support to the Municipality of Nisyros, but it is of high importance since it will make Nisyros well-known all over Europe.

Symi The Municipality of Symi The Municipality of Symi is the second level local Government Administration – called Local Authority – and comprises of an elected Council and its Chairman (Mayor). It is a part of Region of South Aegean, Prefecture of the Dodecanese, Province of Rhodes.

Symi belongs to the Dodecanese islands complex and lies 24 nautical miles NW of Rhodes and 255 nautical miles from the port of Piraeus.

The highest point is Mountain Vigla at 616 meters. The island is very close to the coast of Asia Minor, just 5 miles from Alopos. It is not a very big island, only 67 square kilometers. The majority of the land is 4

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

covered in rocks. Two settlements form the town of Symi: Chorio (Village) and Gialos (Harbor). Pedi, found in the bay of the same name and Nimporios in the bay of the same name, have a few inhabitants.

There is also a big monastery complex, Panormitis, where around 30 people live and take care of the monastery.

Tilos The Municipality of Tilos The Municipality of Tilos is the second level local Government Administration – called Local Authority – and comprises of an elected Council and its Chairman (Mayor). The Municipality supervises services responsible for the planning and development of primary and secondary sector activities in the concrete area, which lies within its administrative boundaries.

The Municipality of Tilos was the beneficiary of the European Project Life-Nature 2000 on Tilos. Project title “Tilos: Conservation Management of an island SPA”. The project objective was to implement management measures in order to improve the conservation status of the bird species of Hieraaetus fasciatus, Falco eleonorae and Phalacrocorax Aristotelis Desmarestii and to set a basis for the SPA management requirements of the site of Tilos.

Tilos’s community has made substantial efforts, often with deprived means and financial aid, to restore and protect the island’s biodiversity. For their efforts, the community: 1. Was named as the sole remarkably positive example in the expressed opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission on “Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 - and beyond - Sustaining ecosystem services for human wellbeing” , quoting from the document: … 4.6 The Greek island of Tilos provides a remarkably positive example of what can be achieved by introducing a ban on hunting. There has been no hunting on this island since 1993 and this has led to a tremendous increase in both the variety of species and the numbers of individuals within the various species. The EU has promoted this development using a number of instruments, including a project implemented under the LIFE program….

2. Was awarded in 2009 with a EuroNatur prize for their long-time commitment in birds’ protection.

The Municipality of Tilos participates in projects and programs and has received funding from the European Regional Development Fund under the 3rd CSF

UAegean The University of the Aegean The University of the Aegean (UAegean) was founded in 1984 aiming to introduce new approaches in higher education in Greece and worldwide and to promote regional development. Situated in 6 picturesque islands in the Aegean Archipelago, the UAegean offers a unique natural, cultural and 5

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

human environment for modern studies in the ancient cradle of knowledge.

The University of the Aegean is an international research oriented university with around 10000 undergraduate and 2000 postgraduate students. It embodies the concept of a 'university- network'- a network of schools and departments dispersed over six Aegean islands: Lesvos, Chios, Samos, Rhodes, Limnos and Syros. The UoA invests in innovative educational programs and multidisciplinary.

The University of Aegean participates in this proposal with: a. the Department of Geography which serves the science of Geography, one of the oldest scientific disciplines. Geography, as a field of academic activity and professional practice, has obtained particular importance in contemporary times that demands integrated and multidisciplinary approaches to the analysis and management of the multidimensional environmental, social and economic problems of modern societies with an emphasis on their spatial and geographical dimensions. b. the Department of Marine Sciences which conducts research in various subjects related to the marine environment, including climate change, ecosystem functioning and health, fisheries, aquaculture and marine resources, as well as issues concerning the coastal zone, such as erosion and pollution, as well as on Marine Environmental Quality, Ecosystem Management and Sustainable Fisheries. c. the Department of the Environment / Laboratory of Local and Island Development whose role is to register and analyze the developments and prospects for island regions - focusing on the Greek island regions - in collaboration with the scientific and policy-making communities, both Greek and international.

HCMR The Hellenic Centre for Marine Research The Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR) was established in 2003 by the presidential decree 164/2003 by merging the Institute of Marine Biology of Crete (IMBC), with the National Center for Marine Research (NCMR) and has more than 500 employees. It is a governmental research institution, supervised by the General Secretariat of Research and Technology.

The HCMR is engaged in research activities in all fields of the Mediterranean aquatic environment and provides comprehensive services and technical support to the public on all aspects of the aquatic environment, advancing scientific knowledge on Greek seas and their resources.

Three Departments of HCMR will be involved in the project: The Department of Marine Biology which has a large experience on marine biodiversity research, as it is involved in the design and monitoring of the Greek marine Natura network.

The Department of Fisheries which has a large experience in producing scientific knowledge that can be used for the management of living resources of fish and shellfish in the Greek Seas. It evaluates and monitors the status and interactions of fisheries and stock of the fish species that are most important to the fishing industry.

6

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

HSIN The Hellenic Small Islands Network The Hellenic Small Islands Network is a non-profit organization in which the municipalities of all islands with a population of under 5,000 inhabitants are members. It was founded in 2007 and is active all over Greece (North Aegean Sea, South Aegean Sea, Ionian Sea, Saronic Bay, Sporades Islands etc.). Its purpose is to develop human and social resources in order to help the improvement of local business activities and support the small islands in several European projects.

HSIN was a member of monitoring committees in the period from 2007 to 2013 in the departments of North Aegean, South Aegean, Ionian, Peloponnesus, and Western Greece. It is also a member of the Sea Policy Council which is supervised by the Greek Prime Minister and it's also a member of the ESIN. ESIN has fully collaborated with HSIN over the past 7 years for several projects in the Dodecanese Islands (Chalki, Tilos, Simi, Nisyros).

It has implemented several European projects: Equal: The creation of a social economy observatory (Nisyros, Chalki, Tilos).

Study for the planning and the organization of mentoring and e-mentoring in the social economy of the small islands.

Study on the activities of the enterprises and organizations of the third- level sector in island regions.

IPD: A formation of cooperative business networks in the maritime sector.

E-conden plus: Medisolae 3D - Mediterranean Islands 3D Aerial navigation & Telematic installations on Greek small islands.

Smart islands: Smart telematic installations concerning social and economic life on Chalki, on Tilos, and on another 10 Greek islands.

Development: A detailed Report of the regional ports of European Mediterranean countries and proposals for their development.

Society of Information: Development of the infrastructure of Local Access Networks. Promotion of development and demand of wide-ranging infrastructure on 10 small Greek islands & Coordination of conferences and seminars (Chalki, Tilos, Symi)

CISD Citizens' Inspectorate for Sustainable Development Citizens' Inspectorate for Sustainable Development is a Non-Profit, Non-Governmental Company, established in October 2012.

The objective of CISD is to safeguard a high quality environment -Physical, Social and Economic- from any adverse anthropogenic impact, whether it has already manifested either constitutes a potential risk, and under these terms works and acts.

7

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

CISD mainly seeks to monitor the way of practice, decision-making and action-taking of all administration levels as well as to structure and promote rational solutions and strategies, in the sense of sustainable development, through the involvement of independent expert scientists and the encouragement of alerted and active citizens to an open participation.

Within this framework, CISD supports as well Local Authorities in decision-making on conflict projects, based on participatory methods and organising public debates and consultation workshops.

The endeavors of CISD cover all Regions of Greece, while local Teams are organized and soon will be transformed into Local Offices.

The 130 registered members of CISD are professionals and academic scientists covering many fields of Environmental, Social, Economy and Engineering fields.

The Scientific Committee is consisted of seven high level academic scientists and supports CISD projects and actions Since its establishment CISD has undertaken many important actions in different fields concerning: (a) the conservation and the protection of important wetlands in danger (e.g. the case of Koronia Lake); (b) sand dunes and coastal ecosystems (the case of Kiparissia - Peloponnisos and Lambia - Kos island); and national campaigns on eco-energy and on integrated waste management.

All actions of CISD are supported by active citizens on an volunteering basis which does never affects their scientific or professional quality.

Have you or any of `your associated beneficiaries already benefited from previous LIFE cofinancing? (please cite LIFE project reference number, title, year, amount of the co-financing, duration, name(s) of coordinating beneficiary and/or partners involved): (Maximum Characters: 5000)

LIFE projects implemented by the Municipality of Tilos / Tilos Park Association are: Title: TILOS - Conservation management of an Island SPA - LIFE04 NAT/GR/000101 Proposed: 2003 Proposed by: Municipality of Tilos Ass. Bodies: Regional Forest Department of South Aegean, Tilos Park, OIKOS �Nature Management Ltd. Co-financing: 618,159.00 euros Duration: 2004-2008 Title: Actions for the Conservation of Larus audouinii* in Greece - LIFE96 NAT/GR/003221 Proposed: 1996 Proposed by: Hellenic Ornithological Society Co-financing: 200.000.000 GRDRS Duration: 1997-99 Title: Conservation of Phalacrocorax pygmaeus* and Anser erythropus* in Greece - LIFE96 8

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

NAT/GR/003217 Proposed: 1996 Proposed by: World Wide Fund for Nature - WWF Hellas Ass. Body: Hellenic Ornithological Society Co- financing: 330.000.000 GRDRS Duration: 1997-99 Title: Implementation of management plans for Pylos lagoon and Evrotas delta, NATURA 2000 sites, Greece - LIFE97 NAT/GR/004247 Proposed: 1997 Proposed by: Hellenic Ornithological Society Co-financing: 470.096.467 GRDRS Duration: 1997-2000 Title: Conservation of the Gypaetus barbatus in Greece - LIFE94 NAT/GR/001557 Proposed: 1998 Proposed by: Natural History Museum of Crete Ass. Body: Hellenic Ornithological Society Co-financing: 337.015.000 GRDRS Duration: 1998-2001 Title: Conservation measures for Falco eleonorae* in Greece - LIFE03 NAT/GR/000091 Proposed: 2003 Proposed by: Hellenic Ornithological Society Ass. Bodies: Natural History Museum of Crete, RSPB, Ministry of Agriculture Co-financing: 870.278 euros Duration: 2003-2007 * Awarded by the Commission as one of the top 25 Life Nature projects for the period 2007-2008 Title: Concrete Conservation Actions for the Mediterranean Shag and Audouin’s Gull in Greece, including the Inventory of Relevant Marine IBAs - LIFE07 NAT/GR/000285 Proposed: 2008 Proposed by: Hellenic Ornithological Society Ass. Bodies: Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the Monk Seal, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Technological Institution of Ionian Islands, Portuguese Society for the Study of Birds Co-financing: 1.768.442 euros Duration: 2009-2012

Have you or any of the associated beneficiaries submitted any actions related directly or indirectly to this project to other European Union funding programmes? To whom? When and with what results? (Maximum Characters: 5000)

None of this project Associated Beneficiaries have submitted proposals related directly or indirectly with this project.

In the past the University of Aegean has participated in other funding programmes in collaboration with Mediterranean and Black Sea countries. More particularly the University has participates in a number of 9

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

previous EC-funded research Framework projects that have relevance for the present proposal, i.e.

ECOWET, EUROCAT, IASON, ECOSTAT, EUROCAT, AQUAMONEY, RUBICODE, SESAME, SPICOSA, CLIMSAVE, CleanSea (multidisciplinary and integrative project and with an interest to involve concerned stakeholders through participatory platforms in the four regional seas) as well as many projects of Greek Ministries and Regions. Inter alia, PERSEUS project, through an innovative combination of natural and socio-economic science, aims to design an effective and resourceful research governance framework, based upon newly collected, sound scientific knowledge in order to promote better governance and achieve Good Environmental Status across the Southern European Seas (SES). The project aims to assess the current environmental status of the Mediterranean and the Black Seas, in a coherent and integrated manner, fill the existing scientific knowledge gaps and then design and support an ecosystem-based approach to management so that the EU goal of Clean Seas by 2020 can become a reality, while conserving the surrounding marine environment.

The Hellenic Centre of Marine Research has also participated in many EU progrmmes. Actually, it participles in current EU projects in which the participant is involved: SESAME, MIPAMEHR, COMMET, ECOMAR, SPICOSA, IASON, PEGASO, FIGIS: Experimental Use of GIS in Fisheries, ABDMAP: Algal Bloom Detection, Monitoring and Mapping, STOCKMED, MEDCORE: Comparative and Integrated Approach to the Ecology of Mediterranean Coastal Zones for Sustainable Management, IMASH-FISH, BECAUSE, PRONE, AFRAME, DEEPFISHMEN, MYFISH, MESMA, CEPHSTOCK: Cephalopod Stocks in European Waters: Review, Analysis, Assessment and Sustainable Management. A current project “AKTI” is aiming at the production of Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plans (ICZMPs) for Rhodes Island, Greece and Larnaka, Cyprus.

For those actions which fall within the eligibility criteria for financing through other European Union funding programs, please explain in full detail why you consider that those actions are better suited to financing through LIFE and are therefore included in the current project. (Maximum Characters: 5000)

The integrated biodiversity conservation approach of the present project cannot be partitioned or divided in modules to be funded by a variety of funding mechanisms, as it will lose any coherence and integration, which is the vital part of its demonstration and innovation character.

Indeed some of the foreseen actions could be proposed for funding from the Structural Funds (Community Support Framework), such as the Regional Operational Programs (PEP) for Aegean islands, and other programs of the new programming period for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020 For the period 2014-2020 the European Commission has adopted a "Partnership Agreement" with Greece setting down the strategy for the optimal use of European Structural and Investment Funds in the country's regions and cities. This paves the way for €15.52 billion current prices in total Cohesion Policy funding (including European Territorial Cooperation funding) and €4.2 billion for rural development to be invested in the country’s real economy. The three regions Crete, North Aegean and South Aegean covered by the Regional Operational Programme of Crete and the Aegean Islands have a rich environment and tourist resources in order to attract high quality tourism, important infrastructure for international connections and prominent research centers and universities. The allocation under Fisheries and Maritime Policy will be finalized and published this summer, €2.53 billion for more developed regions (Attica, South Aegean Islands). However, the lack of co-ordination among the competent authorities, concerning the integration of environmental protection in1 the various development options for a specific site, often results in inappropriate planning and implementation of 10

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio A7

incompatible activities in certain sites (e.g. subsidies for the intensification of agriculture and nature protection for the same area).

Actions related to the conservation of priority species of the local SPA sites could potentially be financed from the Structural Funds, more specifically through the South Aegean Regional Programme concerning the Environment & Sustainable Development, as well as Agriculture and Fisheries Development.

However, due to limited programme funds the funding is restricted for interventions in NATURA 2000 sites for the management of which Management Authorities have been formed. It is very important to underline that the project area is composed by four small islands of South Aegean Region, Chalki, Nisyros, Symi and Tilos, which are included in NATURA 2000 network and SPA but are not managed by any Management Authority and no formation of a Management Authority is scheduled for the immediate future. Therefore in practice, the existing Operational Programmes cannot be a source of funding for planning and implementation of SPA management and conservation actions in the present project SPA site.

Concerning the possible further funding of conservation farming and fisheries practices through the RDF, so far there have been no cases in Greece of funding bird, biodiversity or genetic diversity friendly agricultural, pastoral and fisheries practices through actual agri, pasto and fisheries-environment schemes. Although formally such schemes were introduced 5 years ago as a potential source of funds for the conservation of farmland birds, they were never implemented in practice. During the last years, agri-environment and fisheries payments have practically stopped and therefore, there is not any realistic potential of launching new biodiversity measures in the foreseeable future.

Unfortunately, the present experience from the implementation of previous Community Support frameworks indicates that biodiversity conservation is not a priority for the Greek administration.

Practically, besides the Life initiative, no other significant funds either for protected species or sites have been allocated in Greece, in the last few years.

11

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

Project title:

Business-Based Biodiversity Strategy for South Aegean Small Islands: Concrete actions in Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos Project objectives: (Maximum Characters: 2500) The project, addressing the unique ecosystems of the South Aegean Small Islands, is focused on providing a win-win business-based biodiversity strategy.

It thus focuses on responding at the following objectives:  Identify species and habitat conservation priorities in order to provide favorable conservation conditions and prescribe new management interventions  Safeguard ecosystem biodiversity by influencing rural, coastal, marine and tourism development in ways that enhance wise, sustainable and compatible use of natural resources  Improve land, agricultural and animal husbandry management practices, use livestock zones for sustainable management of grazing lands  Restore islands wetlands and sand dunes, enhancing their role as important biodiversity reservoirs mitigating the impact of flooding and as moderators/adaptors to the impacts of climate change and sea-level rise  Promote sustainable coastal, marine and fishing management practices combating overfishing and the impact of invasive alien species in collaboration with fishers  Conserve marine biodiversity by defining protected areas, enforcing and enlarging the Natura 2000 network  Mitigate impact of threats to species and habitats through the rational/sustainable use of grazing, fishing and fishery function, and tourism  Provide a transparent system for high quality agricultural, livestock’s and seafood products developing responsible investment mechanisms  Improve knowledge of ecosystems and their functions and promote the integration of their value into the economy and social activity  Reflect the Value of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in Policy making  Demonstrate how the economic value of biodiversity factors into decision making  Develop a cost effective policy based on environmental governance  Link biodiversity with entrepreneurship demonstrating that biodiversity and the services it provides have significant economic value  Exploit synergies and coordinated mobilization focusing on greening local economy based on biodiversity conservation  Develop sustainable, community-based, tourism practices generating economic benefits and improving local products and services with respect to biodiversity 

Develop a business-Based Biodiversity Strategy improving governance

12

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

Actions and means involved: (Maximum Characters: 2500) 1. Grazing land improvement leading to high quality agricultural and livestock products, restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources by: o demo projects: sustainable land and pastureland cultivation involving local farmers o pilot integrated-management-plan: fodder crops, transportation, fencing maintenance o identifying and labeling local agro-nutrition products o investment opportunities in sustainable agricultural practices o Local Product and Services Quality Covenant 2. Promotion of marine biodiversity and sustainable fisheries by: o designating marine protected areas after recording, mapping and assessing marine biodiversity o improving management and conservation of fishery resources, minimizing the impact of invasive alien species o safeguarding aquatic stocks and reducing overfishing o providing alternative professional activities for anglers o providing data associated with catches and the study of specific species o implementing fishery co-management strategies through an Integrated Coastal Management Plan 3. Coastal Biodiversity conservation and enhancement, as well as natural flood prevention by: o restoring and conserving biodiversity of coastal wetlands and sand dunes to preserve dependent species diversity and migratory water birds o defining potential adaptation options for coastal wetlands sustainable use to mitigate climate change and sea-level rise impacts o maintaining coastal wetlands hydrological functions integrate them into ICZM 4. Development of a biodiversity-based Tourism Product integrating bio and geo-diversity, land, coastal and marine practices and strengthening the protected area network by: o establishing a Strategic Responsible Tourism Plan applying the CBD Ecosystem Approach o developing an operational ecotourism network involving tour operators, travel agencies, hotels, local shipping companies and communities o minimizing the massive tourism effects by developing a local product tourist market 5. Consolidate the project results through a regional Biodiversity Strategy and Sectoral

13

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

Action Plans o establishing priorities linking tourism, agriculture, fishery, forestry, coastal and marine management o establishing a participatory planning process with the widest possible involvement of the community o assessing impact through Monitor and review system o developing volunteer agreements on cooperation pacts, labeling and certifications schemes, innovative financial resources, etc.

6. Training – Education and Dissemination of the results Expected results (outputs and quantified achievements): (Maximum Characters: 2500) The project shall function as a “starter” for initiatives linking business with biodiversity which could create opportunities for local sustainable development that emphasize and strengthen the competiveness of South Aegean Small Islands.

As such, the current and related future initiatives should be useful as guidelines for future similar regional and national level approaches. Revitalizing traditional agro-pastoral and sustaining fishing models is a driving force for ecosystem and biodiversity preservation and consequently of the most valuable tourism assets of the islands.

The cooperation established between the project’s farmers, livestock keepers, local authorities and private sector, the promotion of integrated crop-livestock systems with access to finance, equipment and machinery, the safeguarding of fishing stocks, should render sustainable management practices more attractive while lessening existing conflicts around land use (grazing).

The transfer of information and know-how, raising local awareness through training and education, would open these societies to a wider future implementation of sustainable practices.

Gradually, this would change the current unsustainable agricultural and pastoral models, halt overgrazing and overfishing and minimize habitat degradation (shrub lands, forest lands, etc). As a result farming will become an attractive and viable livelihood option for the younger people. Additionally, the restoration of natural habitats shall improve the conditions and economic viability of organic agriculture and animal husbandry, resulting in the renewed valuation of biodiversity as an asset.

Reversing the dominant massive and "all-Inclusive" tourism model should provide protection to the coastal zone, wetland and sand dunes ecosystems and biodiversity, preserving the natural flood control mechanisms against the rise of sea levels. New Tourism Products Development, integrating local biodiversity, addressing rural, coastal and marine concerns, designed in collaboration with and for the people will bring added value to the islands as a whole, attracting investments and innovative projects building on new governance practices.

The protection of the Marine and Coastal biodiversity will provide socio-economic opportunities (marine studies research, ecotourism related to diving, regulated fishing, and underwater photography, environmental education), diversifying production (currently mostly fishing) resulting in economic and social benefits.

14

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

Explain why the project can be considered climate-related: (Maximum Characters: 2500) The project’s actions respond, except biodiversity, to the most crucial environmental problems related to the impacts of climate change, including shifting rainfall patterns, rising temperatures, shifts in seasons, and sea level rise. The most vulnerable to climate change sectors of the South Aegean Small Islands include water, health, agriculture, livestock’s, and the coastal areas in general. Minimizing impacts, conserving land, coastal and marine biodiversity, and protecting natural ecosystems can contribute to limit atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. The project contributes in the above mentioned context by: o applying restoration measures to minimize beach erosion [as beaches retreat and/or drown due to (a) long- and short-term sea-level rise, (b) long-term erosion, i.e. irreversible retreat of the shoreline position, due to mean sea-level rise and/or negative coastal sedimentary bufgets that force either landward migration of beaches or drowning, (c) short-term erosion caused by storms/storm surges, which may or may not result in permanent shoreline retreats, but can nevertheless be devastating; o sustaining beach-based touristic sector minimising inundation risk;

the increasing beach erosion and the

o integrating adaptation and mitigation measures into conservation management, planning and practice; o conserving the range of ecological variability of habitats and species; o reducing additional/complimentary sources of threat by developing ecologically resilient and varied landscapes, i.e. enhancing local variation within sites and habitats; o establishing ecological networks through habitat protection, restoration and creation; o establishing accountable processes of data collection and assessment that will enable sound decision-making based on analysis; o using sectoral and integrated modeling techniques to project potential changes in the distributions of species on a local scale, and assess their vulnerability and/or capacity to adapt to climate change; o implementing a wider, integrated terrestrial, freshwater and marine environment policy; o ensuring the high level value of natural farmland, by supporting their restoration, o protecting and restoring fish stocks; o improving freshwater quality as well as marine ecosystems and reducing diffuse pollutant pressures; o providing thematic strategies, demonstration projects and awareness campaigns; o enabling civil society involvement, cooperation and voluntary agreements.

15

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

The proposal addresses the following project topic(s): Projects aimed at implementing Target 2 of the Biodiversity Strategy, through the integration of actions to maintain and enhance ecosystems and their services into the activities of the public or private sectors, by establishing Green as well as Blue Infrastructure and restoring degraded ecosystems.

These projects should test and apply approaches aimed at: o mapping and assessing (including valuation) of ecosystems including marine ecosystems and their services to contribute to a priority setting for restoration, Green or Blue Infrastructure or No Net Loss; o restoring ecosystems including coastal and marine ecosystems and their services by applying the Restoration Priority Framework; o developing methodologies for valuation of and payment for ecosystem services (including tangible and intangible services); Innovative management schemes addressing, in particular, water related ecosystem services, which could provide potential funding mechanisms to achieve the Biodiversity Strategy targets and contribute to aims of the Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive.

Projects implementing actions targeting Invasive Alien Species (under Target 5 of the Biodiversity Strategy or in view of contributing to reaching the level of protection set out in descriptor 2 - Nonindigenous species of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive) through actions testing and applying approaches aimed at: o preventing the introduction of invasive alien species, in particular by tackling pathways of unintentional introduction, o establishing an early warning and rapid response system, o eradicating or controlling established invasive alien species on an appropriate spatial scale.

These projects shall address with their actions the three steps (prevention; early warning and rapid response; eradication/control) in a comprehensive framework, or, where one of the steps has already been addressed, their actions shall at least be clearly situated in a broader framework that links all three steps. They should be set up to improve existing - or introduce new - technical, administrative or legal frameworks on the relevant level; they should aim at preventing the broader establishment of IAS within the EU.

Projects targeting threatened species that are not included in the annexes of the Habitats Directive Pilot or demonstration projects testing and then implementing Green Infrastructure actions focusing on: o innovative technologies and the development and application of technical standards regarding them; o the preservation or restoration of ecosystems for the benefit of human health; o cost-efficient technologies and methods that minimise the impact of existing energy and transport 16

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B1

infrastructures on biodiversity by strengthening the functionality of spatially linked ecosystems.

Reasons why the proposal falls under the selected project topic(s): (Maximum Characters: 2500) The proposal falls mainly under the Targets 2 and 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Targets concerning the Invasive Alien Species and Green Infrastructures by: o integrating concrete actions aiming at maintain and enhance land, coastal and marine ecosystems enhancing the value of their services as a basic element for local economic and social development; o linking biodiversity policies with the market's interest developing partnership between the public and private sectors, by establishing Green as well as Blue Infrastructure and restoring degraded ecosystems; o monitoring and assessing the results of the proposed actions and of the demonstration projects, which will implement in each island, aiming at: o mapping and assessing land, coastal and marine ecosystems and their services (actions A1, C1, A2, C2, A3, C4); o restoring ecosystems including coastal and marine ecosystems and their services by applying the Restoration Priority Framework (actions A2, C2, C3, A3, C4); o developing methodologies and i`dentifying tools for valuation of and payment for ecosystem services and innovative management schemes addressing, in particular, ecosystem services in line with the Water Framework and the Floods Directive (actions A1, C1, C3, C4); o preventing the introduction of invasive alien species, in particular by tackling pathways of unintentional introduction (actions A3, C4, C3), o eradicating or controlling established invasive alien species on an appropriate spatial scale. o establishing an early warning and rapid response system targeting threatened species (not included in the annexes of the Habitats Directive but that have a status of "endangered" or worse in the European Red Lists (action (C3)); o implementing demonstration projects on agri-pastoraland fisheries sustainable practices providing innovative ways of direct or indirect financing (actions A1, C1, C3); All project actions are aiming at contributing to the conservation of the biodiversity and ecosystems for the benefit of human health, while in the same time provide cost-efficient technologies and methods that can minimize the impact and strengthen the functionality of spatially linked ecosystems (Agri-pastoral & fisheries environmental management; Integrated Coastal Zone Management; New Marine protected areas; Coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems biodiversity protection; Participatory decision making process building upon new development and governance practices)

17

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Name of the project site:

Tilos island Surface area (ha): 105300 Surface description (max. 100 chars): Land area: 6450,00 ha Marine area: 98850,00 ha / Natura 2000 area: 6334,71 ha 99% of the land area SPA: X SAC/SCI/pSCI:

NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210024 NATURA 2000 Code:

Other protection status according to national or regional legislation: Besides the existing EU protection status, Tilos and its 16 uninhabited islets are considered as:  Corine Biotopes Project region (identifying habitats of special European importance)  IBA (Important Bird Areas of Europe) since 1989  Important Bird Areas (IBAs - International Designation Code IN06): GR168: Tilos island Main land uses and ownership status of the project area: Tílos Island, with a population of 780 inhabitants, is located in the central part of the SEast Aegean Sea and it forms the Municipality of Tilos. The island has a mountainous, limestone, interior, volcanic lowlands, pumice beds and red lava sand. It is well supplied by springs, and is potentially very fertile and productive. Its coasts are generally rocky or pebbled, but there are also a number of sandy beaches.

The invasion of mass tourism had as a consequence the total abandonment of marginal agricultural cultivations in terraces which supporting the nomadic pastoralists and also the degradation of the island wetlands and the islets, due to the expansion of housing at the coastal area. Tilos economy is depended on tourism. The project area belongs to the administrative Region of South Aegean. All the islets are publically owned. Human activities include agriculture, livestock-farming, and fishing. Tilos is in a biodiversity ’hot spot’ region amongst the highest in Mediterranean.

Scientific description of project area: Longitude 27.371944 Latitude 36.430833 AREA. Altitude: Maximum 600 Mean 165.Biodiversity of Tilos, according to factsheets of NATURA 2000 and IBA: SITE GR4210024 / SITENAME: NISOS TILOS KAI NISIDES: ANTITILOS, PELEKOUSA, GAIDOURONISI, GIAKOUMIS, AGIOS ANDREAS, PRASOUDA, NISI Tilos Island belongs to the administrative region of Dodecanese.

24 bird species, listed on annex I of the council directive 79/409/eec and 39 species on regularly occurring migratory birds not listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC of 6300 ha of the IBA are covered by Special Protection Area (SPA) and are includes to the Natura 2000 network.

Tilos has an important experience by a previous, 2005-2008, EU LIFE Nature Project which has been implemented, concerning the rehabilitation of the population of Bonelli’s Eagles, Eleonora Falcons, and 18

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Mediterranean Shags.

Tilos terrain is, basically, rocky, semi-mountainous and mountainous and Ai-Lias is its highest mountain top (612 m). The small fertile valley of Eristos, in the middle of the island that comes down to the beautiful beach of Eristos, constitutes an exception in Tilos. In Megalo Horio, the soil is more or less fertile, because of the number of springs with good water quality that traverse underground. Many gulf formations, caves and beautiful beaches complete the variety of the island landscape morphological formation.

The existence of three very important for the EU bird species on the island makes Tilos a significant site for the avifauna conservation in the Aegean region and for this reason Tilos is characterized as an Important Bird Area (IBA) and Special Protected Area (SPA).

These species are: o the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus), o the Eleonora's Falcon (Falco eleonorae) and o the Mediterranean Shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii).

Habitats: Artificial landscapes (30%, Arable land; other urban and industrial areas; Perennial crops, orchards and groves; Ruder land), Coastline/rocky areas (20%, Rock stacks and islets; Scree and boulders; Sea cliffs and rocky shores), Sea/marine area (5%, Sea inlets and coastal features), Shrubland (65%, Sclerophyllous scrub, garrigue and maquis) Land use: agriculture (80%), not utilised (10%), tourism/recreation (10%), urban/industrial/transport (5%) Birds: This is an important site for resident raptors and species of Mediterranean scrub. Important bird species according to iba fact sheets: Larus audouini, Caracias garrulous, Puffinus yelkouan,Falco vespertinus.

Pressures: Hunting (illegal or excessive); Land abandonment of traditional crop; Tourism (not sustainable, massive model); Fisheries (unlawful excessive): Overgrazing; Residential development; Presence of rat eggs chicks

Description of species / habitats / Biodiversity issues targeted BY THE PROJECT Habitat types: The most important of the existing types are the Mediterranean temporary ponds at the village of Livadia, the biotope of Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea near the coasts of Eristos and the region of Missaria and Skafi and the Embryonic shifting dunes at the beach of Eristos and - in small range - other beaches of the island, as that of Skafi which represent the first stage 19

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

of dunes formation. In the past, two natural wetlands existed on the island at the sites of Stolous in Megalo Horio and in Livadia.

Endemic and rare species: More than 450 plant species exist in Tilos; some of them common to the whole of Western Europe, whilst others purely Mediterranean. The species that flourish in Tilos are the Jerusalem sage (Phlomis floccosa), the Medick lucerne (Medicago heyniana Greuter), the Mullein (Verbascum), the Bellflower (Campanula simulans CarlstrĂśm), a lot of orchids (8 species of Ophrys and 4 species of Serapias), the Mount Tabor oak (Quercus ithaburensis subsp. Macrolepis) and 5 more species of oak, a lot of rakis (gramithia) which are widespread around the island, the Sea pancratium lily (Pancratium maritimum), the Sea eryngo (Eryngium maritimum) at Eristos beach, wild tea (Sideritis curvidens) and the ladinos (7 species of Trifolium).

The following species have been included in the Greek Red List of threatened plants (IUCN list): o o o o o

Leontice leontopetalum subsp. leontopetalum (VU) Medicago heyniana (VU) Origanum calcaratum (GREEK ENDEMIC) (VU) Roemeria hybrida subsp. hybrida (VU) Silene holzmannii (AEGEAN ENDEMIC) (EN)

Fauna: The long-term isolation of Tilos from other populations has resulted in the creation of unique endemic forms that do not exist elsewhere and present peculiarities which form a unique biodiversity mosaic.

Monk Seal and the Common Dolphins are the most important and remarkable mammals in the coastline and the surrounding marine area.

More than 100 bird species regularly use Tilos, as a migration stop over site, a huge number in relation to the island size, and it is considered an important element of its natural environment.

The particular importance of Tilos island for birds is documented because it has an important - in European or national level - population of certain species, such as the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) (5-6 pairs), the long –legged buzzard (Buteo rufinus (6-8 pairs), the Eleonora's Falcon (Falco eleonorae) (> 500 pairs) and the Mediterranean Shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii) (25-30 pairs).

The European Roller (Coracias garrulus), has a breeding population of 10-30 pairs, the best population in the Aegean region. Numerous reptile species live in Tilos in arid and dry areas and near rocks or stones. Among them the most important are the lizards Cyrtopodion kotschyi, Laudakia stellio, Hemidactylus turcicus, Ophisops elegans, Ablepharus kitaibelii and the snake Montivipera xanthina.

Sixteen diurnal species of lepidoptera insects are found on Tilos island.

Coastal wetlands and sand dunes: The small wetland (0,2 acres) of Livadia on the island of Tilos is of a great importance, but it is constantly shrinking due to human intervention and tourism infrastructure pressures. Habitat code 3170.

Protection and conservation of the wetland can be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness. Relatively extensive sand dunes structures in Eristos and Skafi, are a common habitat in Greece. Shrinking due to human 20

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

activities associated with tourism development on sandy beaches. Protection and conservation is necessary, not only because of the wetland and sand dunes’ biodiversity but also because of their importance as natural mechanisms of flood control against sea level rise Sea Life: The marine world around Tilos island is very rich. The visitors to the sea-bed will encounter numerous Sandsmelts (Atherinomorus lacunosus), 2 species of Squaretail rabbitfish (Siganus luridus and Siganus rivulatus), Reticulated leatherjackets (Stephanolepis diaspros), 3 species of Mullets (Sargocentron hastatus, Dussumieria acuta and Leiognathus lunzingeri) and the Fish hedgehog (Lagocephalus spadiceus). Tuna also is present (Thunnus alalunga, Thunnus thunnus) and Bonitos (Katsuwonus pelamis), which face overfishing problems. The presence of the rare Moonfish (Mola mola) is also important in Tilos waters.

Benthic life: Tilos island coasts belong to a wider water mass defined as ‘Water bodies in the outer Deinaro-Tauric arc’. This unity includes water bodies that are significantly influenced by the typical hyper-oligotrophic water mass of the eastern Mediterranean. The area is known as a hot spot of biodiversity. In order to manage in a sustainable way the biodiversity of South Aegean a large network of Natura sites was established. The fish fauna of the studied area includes characteristic species of the Eastern Mediterranean, while a big number of species, like Siganus rivulatus, Siganus turidus, Sargecentron rubrum, Stephanolopis diaspros, Pempheris vanicolensis etc have been considered as alien species entered in the Mediterranean basin through Suez canal. Some of them, like Siganus rivulatus and Sargecentron rubrumare very abundant in the whole area of Dodecanese islands.

There are only few data regarding the fish fauna of the whole area. A typical community characteristic of these high energy environments is that of the Amphioxus sand community comprising of the hemichordateBranchiostomma lanceolatum which is considered a key biodiversity element. A higher diversity and species richness is usually found in sub littoral combination sediments like that of the Biogenic Detritic sand communities (DC) characterized also as coralligenous sand or “tragana”, a community type belonging both to sedimentary as well as in rocky deep type. This kind of water body is also frequently found in the Ionian Sea as for example in the eastern Ionian coasts. This kind of habitat is developed in mixed combination sediments and this heterogeneity favours biodiversity. The study area was classified as part of the biogeographic “Lessepsian Province” of the Mediterranean Sea, since it offers suitable environmental conditions for the establishment of thermophiles organisms, including tropical or sub-tropical species from the Red Sea and the Indo-Pacific ocean introduced via the Suez Canal (the so-called Lessepsian immigrants). The fish fauna of the area presents an increased abundance of some characteristic species, like Cypselurus meterurus, Synodus saurus, Siganus rivulatus, Pempheris vanicolensis, Sargecentron rubrum, Anthias anthias, Epinephelus sp, Xyrichthys novacula, Sparisoma cretense.

The alarming reduction of cattle genetic diversity and the classification of several cattle and sheep breeds as endangered reflect the urgent need for a drastic shift in relevant policies, before an irreversible homogenisation of the livestock genetic pool occurs. Mediterranean climate ecosystems are considered among the most threatened by invasive alien species.

Importance of the project area for biodiversity and/or for the conservation of the species /

21

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

habitat types targeted at regional, national and EU level (give quantitative information if possible): TILOS island is considered to be among the most important Aegean islands for biodiversity, hosting nationally and EU wide important populations for birds such as Falco eleonorae (about 5% of the national population and 3% of the global population breed here), 3.75% of the national breeding population of Larus audouinii and 3% of Greek national breeding population and 0.5% of the subspecies EU population of Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii, as also of Sylvia rueppelli, buteo rufinus, caracias garrules, and emberiza caesia (Nisyros island). The island is also considered to be the most important breeding site for Bonelli’s eagle in Greece, hosting 5 pairs of the species (of the 100-140 pairs breeding in Greece).

In addition, Calonectris diomedea, Puffinus yelkouan, Coracias garrulous, and Emberiza caesia have very good populations in the area. A number of reptile species and many invertebrates such as Lepidoptera species are giving further biodiversity value. Flora of South Aegean Small Islands is very rich and 5 taxa are endemic and have been included in the Greek red Data Book. Tilos coastal and marine area is considered important for sea mammals such as the Monk Seal Monachus monachus.

Tilos is a 63 sq km island of international importance for 155 wild bird species, 38 of which are legally protected and listed in Annex I of 79/409/EEC, including 14 breeding pairs of resident raptors [6 pairs of Bonelli’s Eagles and 8 pairs of Long Legged Buzzards], 650 breeding pairs of Eleonora’s Falcons representing 10% of the world population of this threatened species, as well as migratory bird species that use Tilos as a stopover between Africa and Europe.

The region is a Corine Biotopes Project region (identifying habitats of special European importance), an IBA (Important Bird Areas of Europe) since 1989, and the host to a 2005-2008 EU LIFE Nature Project to rehabilitate the population of Bonelli’s Eagles (Hieraaetus fasciatus), Eleonora Falcons (Falco eleonora) and Mediterranean Shags (Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii).

This remote island is also characterized by 16 uninhabited islets hosting colonies of threatened bird species, 6 semi-mountainous volumes (300 m.), the highest regional formation of coastal limestone cliffs, 16 biotopes recognized under 92/43/EEC (with 3 identified as priority biotopes for special protection), 377 native flora species (including 28 orchid species of which 8 are classified as rare), a network of fresh water underground springs, forested areas, and a marine environment that hosts endangered species such as the Mediterranean Monk Seal (Monachus monachus), the Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), Posidonia sea grasses, and more. The region is a Corine Biotopes Project region (identifying habitats of special European importance), an IBA (Important Bird Areas of Europe) since 1989, and the host to a 2005-2008 EU LIFE Nature Project to rehabilitate the population of Bonelli’s Eagles (Hieraaetus fasciatus), Eleonora Falcons (Falco eleonora) and Mediterranean Shags (Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii).

More particularly: Tilos habitat types The most important of the existing types are the Mediterranean temporary ponds at the village of Livadia, the biotope of Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea near the coasts of Eristos and the region of Missaria and Skafi and the Embryonic shifting dunes at the beach of Eristos and - in small range - other beaches of the island, as that of Skafi which represent the first stage of dunes formation. In the past, two natural wetlands existed on the island at the sites of Stolous in Megalo Horio and in Livadia. On Tilos Island there are a numerous variety of plants, mainly in spring.

22

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Plant species of all the representative habitat types and in different soil conditions are found around the island.

The most famous species are : Jerusalem sage (Phlomis floccosa), the Medick lucerne (Medicago heyniana Greuter), the Mullein (Verbascum), the Bellflower (Campanula simulans Carlstrรถm), a lot of orchids (8 species of Ophrys and 4 species of Serapias), the Mount Tabor oak (Quercus ithaburensis subsp. Macrolepis) and 5 more species of oak, a lot of rakis (gramithia) which are widespread around the island, the Sea pancratium lily (Pancratium maritimum), the Sea eryngo (Eryngium maritimum) at Eristos beach, wild tea (Sideritis curvidens) and the ladinos (7 species of Trifolium).

Annex I of the European Union Habitats Directive 92/43/EC contains many habitat types found on the island (they consist of habitat types requiring protection) and/or in Corine. Below, there is an analytical Table of habitat types that are found on Tilos, for those who love or study nature.

Code Habitat types & Flora species per habitat type (92/43/EC) 1210

Annual vegetation of drift lines

1240

Vegetated sea cliffs of the Mediterranean coasts with endemic Limonium spp. Limonium ocymifolium , Trigonella rechingeri

2110

Embryonic shifting dunes, Elymus farctus (Agropyron junceum), Otanthus maritimus, Anthemis tomentosa, Eryngium maritimum, Pancratium maritimum Thermo-Mediterranean and pre-desert scrub, Euphorbia dendroides 5420 Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas Medicago heyniana , Quercus aucheri, Verbascum mykales, Verbascum symes

5330 5340

Thicket with oak, Quercus aucheri

8210

Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; Campanula hagielia; Dianthus fruticosus subsp. Rhodius Limestone rocks of Aegean; Allium archeotrichum; Anthemis scopulorum; Fibigia lunarioides

8217 8310

Caves not open to the public

8330

Submerged or partially submerged sea caves

9320

Olea and Ceratonia forests

9350

Quercus macrolepis forests; Quercus macrolepis

1120*

Posidonia beds (Posidonion oceanicae)

3170*

Mediterranean temporary ponds

6220*

Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea, TheroBrachypodietea

23

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

92D0

Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae) Nerio-Tamariceteae, Securigerion tinctoriae

Although progress has been made in safeguarding biodiversity, and relevant legislative rules and measures are in place, there is still a lack of political will and citizen’s information and awareness.

Added to these is a poor implementation of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, and total lack of reparation measures for Natura 2000 sites. Those are due to low quality or lack of Appropriate Environmental Assessments for small and major projects, as well as a lack of enforcement of the relevant Environmental Terms. There are still pending infringement measures regarding the protection of SPA and Natura 2000 site degradation.

Therefore, the present development model of South Aegean Islands is becoming less and less friendly towards the biodiversity but at the same time, the development of tourism, albeit its ecosystem damages, provides a window of opportunity for their preservation. This is, because in contrast to other Aegean islands, Tilos still maintain a natural and cultural landscape of unique beauty that attracts good quality tourism and has not yet become spoiled by excessive tourist development. As a consequence, biodiversity is still one of the valuable assets especially for visitors and this has the potential to increase the value of well-preserved natural ecosystems, biodiversity and landscapes in the eyes of local society.

On the other hand, due to the rugged terrain and the small size, limits scope of productive activities, resulting in problems of land distribution and water management (resource deficiency).

Moreover, this Island, which is Natura 2000 site, the last years faced a radical decrese of the fishing product, due to the augmentation of sea mammal members (dolphins and monk seals) and of the lagocephalus fish, which deplete the fishermen’ catches and destroy their fishing gear, consequently increasing their expenses and diminishing their gains also causing serious problems to fishes’ diversity.

The noticeable geographical isolation and the lack of infrastructure creates an urgent need for improvement of living conditions for the local population and the “lifting of quarantine” regarding these islands.

The relatively small scale and extremely wide diversity of human activities and the peculiar perception and behavior of the population in relation to space, but also the Island cultural and natural heritage, are shaping peculiar dynamics and complex of relationships between the island population and the sea. The relatively limited availability of productive resources, accentuated the large seasonal variations of human populations and the economic activities. In addition, the natural discontinuity of space creates problems in coherence, the functionality and the integration (with the concept of integration of individual units-systems) of the economic and social area.

The spatial discontinuity significantly affects the interfaces and operations, product and labor markets, the choice of location of activities, competition and pricing, the cost of production, transport and communications, etc. The small population is a small consumer market with limited demand for goods and services, making economies of scale impossible – thus impossible to reduce costs for businesses and households. and more, the small island area, which contains restricted natural resources and a lack of hinterland, make for an extremely fragile environmental balance, which needs a very specific environmental management.

24

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Name of the project site:

Symi Island Surface area (ha): 69050 Surface description (max. 100 chars): Land area: 5.790 ha; Marine area: 63.260 ha; Natura 2000 site area: 2.303,10 ha SPA: X SAC/SCI/pSCI:

NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210025 NATURA 2000 Code:

Other protection status according to national or regional legislation: REFUGE WILDLIFE: COD .ΙΒΑ GR167; GR95 Erimonisia Seskli-Nimos (Symis) + 28.18 GR95 Nisides Chondros, Marmaras, Gialesinos kai Kouloundros tis S * 2.26 Designated at International level IN06 Nisos Symi kai Geitonikes Nisides Main land uses and ownership status of the project area: The Island and the surrounding islets are included in archeological protection status, as there are 159 archeological areas and monuments. Half of the current active population is engaged in the building industry, in commerce and tourism, including restaurants, hotels and transport. At present, tourism in Symi is dependent on daily visitors coming from Rhodes and visitors who stay in Symi for a couple of days. Symi is famous for the high quality of livestock and fishery products (i.e. Symian shrimp) and for the excellent quality of its honey.

A few number of people are engaged in agriculture, farming and fishery.

Land use: Agriculture fisheries/aquaculture military, not utilized tourism/recreation

80% 5% 10% 10%

Scientific description of project area: Symi Island is one of the Dodecanese islands, located in South East Aegean Sea and lies 24 nautical miles off the shore of Rhodes Islands and 255 nautical miles from Piraeus. The island is very close to the coast of Minor Asia, 5 miles from the cape Alopos. The entire size is 67 km2. Its length from South to the North is 10 km and the width is 8 km.

Symi is a rocky island of 67 square kilometers covered with phrygana and conifer forest. Symi belongs to the prefecture of the Dodecanese and is 26 nautical miles away from Rhodes and 255 nautical miles from the port of Piraeus. The highest point is Mountain Vigla at 616 meters. The adjacent islets are un-

25

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

vegetated or covered with scrub. Human activities include fishing, tourism, stock-raising, and arable agriculture. The shipbuilding and sponge industries were substantial on the island and, while at their peak near the end of the nineteenth century, the population reached 22,500. Symi's main industry is now tourism and the population has declined to 2,500. Its interior is dotted with small valleys, and its coastline alternates between rocky cliffs and beaches, and isolated coves. Its main town, located on the northeast coast, is also named Symi and consists of the lower town around the harbor, typically referred to as Yialos, and the upper town is called Horio or Ano Symi. Other inhabited localities are Pedi, Nimborio, Marathounda and Panormitis. Panormitis is the location of the island's famous monastery which is visited by people from all over the world, and many Greeks pay homage to St Michael of Panormitis each year.

The history of the island begins in the ancient times when some of its names were Kirki, Aigli and Metapontis. The island got its current name from the nymph Symi, who according to greek mythology married the God of the seas Poseidon and brought to life Hthonios who became the leader of the islands inhabitants. Homer mentions Symi in the Heliade, for its participation in the Trojan War, headed by the Symiot King Nireas.

The Island and the surrounding islets are included in archeological protection status, as there are 159 archeological areas and monuments.

Half of the current active population is engaged in the building industry, as well as in commerce and tourism including restaurants, hotels and transport. At present, tourism in Symi is dependent on daily visitors who come from Rhodes and visitors who stay in Symi for a couple of days.

Habitats Artificial landscapes (5%, Arable land; other urban and industrial areas; Perennial crops, orchards and groves; Ruderal land), Coastline/rocky areas (25%, Rock stacks and islets; Scree and boulders; Sea cliffs and rocky shores), Forest (20%, Native coniferous woodland), Sea/marine area (5%, Open Sea; Sea inlets and coastal features), Shrubland (55%, Sclerophyllous scrub, garrigue and maquis) Birds This is an important site for seabirds.

Larus audouinii Audouin's Gull : resident since 1997 Falco eleonorae Eleonora's Falcon: breeding since 1996 Frequent unknown B2 Conservation issues Overfishing and illegal fishing with dynamite are serious problems. Fires are a potential threat.

Threats: abandonment/reduction of land management (medium), aquaculture/fisheries (medium), burning of vegetation (unknown), groundwater abstraction (unknown), infrastructure (high), recreation/tourism (high), selective logging/cutting (low), unsustainable exploitation (medium).

BIODIVERSITY

The existence of two very important bird species –for Europe-on the island , makes Symi island and adjacent islets a very important site for seabirds in the Aegean and is already characterized as important Bird Area (IBA) and special Protected area (SPA) . These species are the Laurus audouinii (Audouin’s Gull) –resident and the Falco eleonarae ( Eleonora’s Falcon ) –breeding. Other species that can be observed in Symi and its islets are o Anthrus trivialis trivialis 26

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Apus apus apus Apus melba melba Apus pallidus illyricus Buteo rufinus rufinus Calonectris diomedea Delichon urbica urbica Falco peregrinus brookei Hieraaetus fasciatus Hippolais olivetorum Hippolais pallid elaeica Hirundo rustica rustica Hydrobates pelagicus Motacilla alba alba Motacilla flava beema Muscicapa striata meumanni Oenanthe hispanica Oenanthe oenanthe oenanthe Otus scops Phalacrocorax aristotelis Puffinus puffinus puffinus Streptopelia turtur Upupa epops epops

FLORA

The island is predominantly composed of limestone, presenting a rocky, and very barren appearance, and due to the nature of terrain, few areas can be used for cultivation or horticultural purposes. Three fairly fertile valleys can be found on the island of at Pedi, Drakounda and Agios Vassilios. The Pedi valley area predominantly consists of wheat fields, some olive groves and fruit orchads can be found close to farmland areas, whilst at Agios Vassilios vineyards were also present. The viper area of the valley is dominated by phrygana and other plant cover such as Euphorbia dendroides, as well as Origanum heracleoticum, Dracunculus vulgaris and Arum dioscoridis. In the inland the visitor can enjoy a unique forest of 30km2. with Cupressus sempervirens var. Horizontalis &-Pinus brutia.

Some of the other plant species that flourish in Symi and satisfy the sense of smell are: o Quercus coccifera o Ceratonia siligua o Arbutus unedo o Olea oleaster o Pistacia lentiscus o Thymus capitatus o Salbia officinalis o Menta pulegium o Cyclamen graecum o Gladiolus segetus o Different species of Crocus o Different species of Asphodelus o Urginea maritime.

27

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

HERPETOFAUNA OF SYMI

Despite its small size and preponderance of arid habitats, Symi exhibits an interesting and fairly diverse herpetofauna. The most common species include Laudakia stellio, Anatololacerta oertzeni; Ophisops elegans; Hemidactylus turcicus; Cyrtopodion kotschyi; while others such as Testudo graeca; Dolichophis jugularis; Montivipera xanthina; Bufo viridis; Hemorrhois nummifer; Blanus strauchi and Ablepharus kitaibelii still seem to be abundant, with suitable conditions. Rare species such as Telescopes fallax; Eirenis modestus and Trachylepis aurata can be found.

In particular the island’s cultivated valleys (Pedi & Drakounda ) are species –rich. These area contain numerous terraced fields with stone walls and shade –providing trees that are generally lacking in more natural parts of the island. Five species (L. stellio; O. elegans; A. oertzeni; B. strauchi and E. modestus) are known from the neighboring islet of Sesklia. As to its herpetofauna, Symi seems to be extremely favorable.

Importance of the project area for biodiversity and/or for the conservation of the species / habitat types targeted at regional, national and EU level (give quantitative information if possible): Symi also transliterated Syme or Simi (Greek: Σύμη) is a Greek island and municipality. It is mountainous and includes the harbor town of Symi and its adjacent upper town Ano Symi, as well as several smaller localities, beaches, and areas of significance in history and mythology. Symi is part of the Rhodes regional unit.Simi is rocky and covered with phrygana and conifer forest. The adjacent islets are unvegetated or covered with scrub. Human activities include fishing, tourism, stock-raising, and arable agriculture.

Habitats: Artificial landscapes (5%, Arable land; Other urban and industrial areas; Perennial crops, orchards and groves; Ruderal land), Coastline/rocky areas (25%, Rock stacks and islets; Scree and boulders; Sea cliffs and rocky shores), Forest (20%, Native coniferous woodland), Sea/marine area (5%, Open Sea; Sea inlets and coastal features), Shrubland (55%, Sclerophyllous scrub, garrigue and maquis) The shipbuilding and sponge industries were substantial on the island and, while at their peak near the end of the 19th century, the population reached 22,500. Symi's main industry is now tourism and the population has declined to 2,500. Symi belongs to the Dodecanese islands complex and lies 24 nautical miles NW of Rhodes and 255 nautical miles from the port of Piraeus. The highest point is Mountain Vigla at 616 metres. The island is very close to the coast of Asia Minor, just 5 miles from Alopos. It is not a very big island, only 67 square kilometres. The majority of the land is covered in rocks. Two settlements form the town of Symi : Chorio (Village) and Gialos ( Harbour). Pedi, found in the bay of the same name and Nimporios in the bay of the same name, have a few inhabitants. There is also a big monastery complex, Panormitis, where around 30 people live and take care of the monastery.

There are a number of islets around Symi, such as Nimos, which is the largest one, as well as Sesklia, Artikonisi, Koulountro, Troubeto, Chondros, Plati, Oxia, Diabates, Marmaras. All these small islands can be visited by boats.

Half of the current active population is engaged in the building industry, as well as in commerce and tourism including restaurants, hotels and transport. At present, tourism in Symi is dependent on daily visitors who come from Rhodes and visitors who stay in Symi for a couple of days. Symiots who live abroad visit Symi for their vacations during the summer months as well. The duration of the touristic 28

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

season lasts 7 months (April - October). High season lasts three months July - September. A few numbers of people are engaged in agriculture, farming and fishery. Boat building and wood carving (furniture, decorative motives in interior architecture) flourished in the past. Nowadays two small boats yards are operating mainly for the construction and repair of the fishing boats.

Traditional occupations: The first inhabitant of the island according to the mythology was Glafkos, who set off from a town in Voiotia and wandered for quite some time before settling on the island. He was a great swimmer, fisherman and shipbuilder and taught these crafts to the island's inhabitants.

Symi also had other names in the antiquity, such as Kariki, Metapontis, Aegli and Elkousa. During the Trojan War, Symi participated with its king, Nireus with three ships, as mentioned by Homer. He was the most handsome king, as he says, after Achilles.

The shipbuilding and sponge industries were substantial on the island and, while at their peak near the end of the nineteenth century, the population reached 22,500. Symi's main industry is now tourism and the population has declined to 2,500.

Symi confronted poverty at that time: the replacement of sailing with motor ships occurred, sponge diving decreased and world war II begun resulting in a greater migration wave of Symiots abroad.

Biodiversity We consider quantification of biodiversity in the context of targets set by the Convention on Biological Diversity. Implicit in such targets is a requirement to monitor biodiversity at a regional level. Few monitoring schemes are designed with these targets in mind. Monitored sites are typically not selected to be representative of a wider region, and measures of biodiversity are often biased by a failure to account for varying detectability among species and across time. Precision is often not adequately quantified.

We review methods for quantifying the biodiversity of regions, consider issues that should be addressed in designing and evaluating a regional monitoring scheme, and offer a practical guide to what types of survey are appropriate for addressing different objectives for biodiversity monitoring: o Actions for the protection of birds and management of their habitats (monitoring of protected areas, population census, enhancement of the natural environment, habitats management and restoration) o Actions of environmental education (implementation of environmental education programmes, support of environmental education programmes at schools) o Actions of public awareness (operation of information centres all over Greece, public awareness events, bird watching activities) o HOS works closely with institutions and provides valuable scientific knowledge for the management and designation of the IBAS. It also works on the updating of the environmental law and is effective implementation, as well as intervenes for the protection of the protected areas.

29

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Name of the project site:

Chalki Island Surface area (ha): 66200 Surface description (max. 100 chars): Land area: 3.700 ha; Marine area: 62.500 ha; Matura 2000 area: 3.622,88 ha (99%) SPA: X SAC/SCI/pSCI:

NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210026 NATURA 2000 Code:

Other protection status according to national or regional legislation: No National or Regional Protection Regime International: none Main land uses and ownership status of the project area: Chalki is a small rocky island with degraded vegetation, which belongs to a group of small islets. Human activities are livestock, hunting, tourism and arable crops.

Surface (acres)

Total

Distribution (%)

Surface (acres)

Distribution (%)

36.100

100,00%

2.704.000

100,00%

1.000

2,77%

765.900

28,32%

Pasture

17.900

49,58%

520.400

19,25%

Forest

3.800

10,53%

1.200.500

44,40%

13.400

37,12%

217.200

8,03%

Agricultural land

Other areas

Land use: agricultural uses (85%), fisheries/aquaculture, not used (10%), tourism/recreation (5%), urban/industrial/transport Threats: abandonment/reduction in land management (moderate), agricultural intensification (moderate), unsustainable exploitation (high) Scientific description of project area: Chalki is located in the southern Dodecanese, west of Rhodes and is the 12th island of the Dodecanese, with area of about 27.240 acres and spread coast 34 kilometers. East of the island, in the administrative boundreries of Chalki, there are 13 smaller islands, most of which is Alimia (7590 acres), AG. Theodore (670 acres), Makri (625 acres), the Nissaki (420 acres), the Atrakoysa (265 acres) and Stroggili (220 acres). These islands have a total area of 9.790 acres. Only the island of Chalki is 30

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

inhabited. The remaining islands are deserted.

Air average temperature is around to 19th C. The annual rainfall ranges between 400-450 chls. It falls primarily to the winter season (November-April), while the summer is long, hot and dry. A large part of the rainy season is torrential resulting water flows easily and causes erosion. The other feature of the climate is strong north winds, annually known as “etisies”, who have blown during the summer season of the year (April-September). According to the classification of Emberger, climate of Chalki is characterized as a semi-dry Mediterranean with mild winters and intense organic dry days 125-150.

Result of this climate is the limitation of growth period of crops during the winter season, while summer is not suitable for plant growth. Essentially the growth season begins in November and ends in May. The maximum increase occurs during the months of March and April.

The largest part of its surface is covered by grasslands, while forests are almost non-existent. A natural forest exists only in the area of «Pefkias». The dominant grassland vegetation is the rangeland type fryganolibada, which dominates the astoibida (Sacropoteriumspinosum) and follow the θαμνολίβαδα , with dominant species the schoino (Pistacialentiscus).

The largest part of its surface is covered by grasslands and forests are almost non-existent. Natural forest exists only in the area of “Pefkias”. The dominant vegetation is the rangeland type «fryganolibada», which dominates the Sacropoteriumspinosum and follow, with dominant species in Pistacialentiscus. Same vegetation types there are and the other islands of the band with the observation that there are extensive thamnolibada agriokyparisioy Alimia (Juniperusphoenicea).

Chalki and its small islets Stroggili, Ag. Theodoros, Nissaki and Alimia along with smaller islets Colophon, Pano Prasouda, Tragousa, Maelonisi and Krevati, belong to MATURA 200 Network and are covered by the special protection area (SPA) for important species of avifauna that host. These species are the Aigaioglaros, which is endemic, the Eleonora's Falcon which are Predator (Falcon) and the Moystakotsiribakos. In addition to the above species, Chalki spizaetoi and there are some known pairs.

There are in the region many endemic, endangered and protected species of flora, whose presence is also affected by the trainee management of farm animals. These items amount to 31 and are found mainly in Chalki.

The water supply needs of the island are covered with water transport from Rhodes with the water board. Total transported 65,000 km. water a year. Since 2013 is constructed a desalination unit in the island of Chalki for water supply and irrigation and is 600km/day capacity. All of the water that is expected to generate, will surpass 200,000 km.., which means that it will exceed the current possibilities. However, the use of water for irrigation will depend solely on the operating costs of the system.

PLANT PRODUCTION

The agricultural land that can be cultivated is 1,000 acres. The land areas which are characterized as pasture land are of 17.900 acres. The utilized pasture, however, is only 4.045,6 acres. The extent of 3,800 acres is characterized as forests covered by shrubby vegetation. Livestock grazing and sheep in particular is the dominant land use. The cultivated land is clearly separated from the rest of the island.

The islets are also exclusive grazing while agriculture does not exist. Generally there are three types of pasture: the abandoned plots, the fryganolibada and the thamnolibada.

Habitats Rocky areas (35%: internal steep cliffs, Rocky islets, Screes and columns (Scree) and boulders, steep and rocky coasts),

31

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Prairies (20%: dried calcareous grasslands and Steppes), Sea areas (5%: Marine bays and coastal formations), Scrub (75%: bushes), Wetlands (Salted marshes, Beaches with pebbles and stones) Conservation status The main threats are the very intense hunting pressure and overgrazing. The Spizaetoi (Hieraaetus fasciatus) are shot and their nests are destroyed. The chicks of Falco eleonorae killed to serve as food.

Over 6,000 goats are grazing in Chalki.

Threats: abandonment/reduction in land management (moderate), agricultural intensification (moderate), unsustainable exploitation (high) EU protection status: CHALKI SPA x NATURA 2000 Code : GR-4210026 (part of the project site) / NISOS CHALKI KAI NISIDES: KOLOFONA, PANO PRASOUDA, TRAGOUSA, STRONGYLI, AGIOS THEODOROS, MAELONISI, ALIMIA, KREVVATI, NISAKI Criteria: A1, B2, B3, C1, C6 Coordinates: 36o 14' B 27o 37' A (Χάρτης) Altitude: 0-601 μέτρα Size: 39,000 στρ.

Eleonora’s falcon is the most important bird species.

Importance of the project area for biodiversity and/or for the conservation of the species / habitat types targeted at regional, national and EU level (give quantitative information if possible): Islands ecosystems of South Aegean region, and especially the islands of the project area, have used and managed in a sustainable way for centuries and this is the causal factor for the preservation of the high biodiversity values on the islands. This management was related to an extensive and low input model, combining low intensity farming with extensive livestock keeping, and other small scale activities such as bee keeping, fishing or small scale tourism in the last few decades. This combination permitted the maintenance of small agricultural parcels, cultivated either with fodder crops for livestock or with local crop varieties used primarily for local consumption.

This model persisted for centuries, resulting in well preserved mountain ecosystems with scrublands and pasturelands of high quality, under low grazing pressure, capable of supporting a wide range of biodiversity, including local endemic plants, passerine birds and birds of prey. The wetland ecosystem of the island, being also part of the extensive pastoralist model, were also preserved in good quality, providing valuable habitat for migratory water birds, as well as for local biodiversity such as bats, terrapins and passerines.

Thirty years ago, this model started collapsing, as is the case in most southern European regions.

Changes disrupted the rotational and nomadic pastoralist model. As a result, animals are kept on the mountain or in secluded pasturelands in the rest of the island, year round, overgrazing the habitat and resulting in the degradation of scrublands and forest lands all over the island. The EU subsidies of the last 30 years have resulted in increased numbers of animals at the site and thus to a larger overgrazing problem.

32

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

At the same time, the invasion of mass tourism had as a consequence the abandonment of marginal agricultural cultivations in terraces, which had stopped to play a critical role for the support of the nomadic pastoralist and thus were of no practical value for the farmers. These cultivations used to provide valuable foraging habitat for resident and migratory birds. Tourism had a second negative impact, as it is related to the expansion of housing at the coastal area, destroying or degrading the remaining island wetlands. It also brings visitors to remote and uninhabited islets and near rocky coastline, where important colonies of seabirds and Eleonora’s falcon exist, including populations of rare chasmophytic plants.

Actually, South Aegean Islands face common challenges, relating to the fact that their economies depend on tourism mainly causing serious negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity, requiring common strategies and solutions. Unsustainable production and consumption patterns, still yet characterize rural and coastal management in Aegean ecosystems, as result of extensive urban pressures and massive tourism, cutting down forests (for resources or to expand city borders), illegal fishing and massive resort buildings construction to satisfy high tourism demand.

These patterns have serious consequences to the local biodiversity, affecting in the same time the local economy, the society and the quality of life. The pollution persistence, the global climate change, the misuse of hunting or fishing privileges, and/or when non-native plants or animals are directly or indirectly introduced into another habitat land, are also threatening local biodiversity.

Tourism is one of the world’s fastest growing industries as well as the major source of foreign exchange earnings and employment, and it is increasingly focusing on natural environments. Tourism contributes in a positive manner to socio-economic achievements but, but in the same time, its fast and uncontrolled growth can be the major cause of degradation of the environment and loss of local identity and traditional cultures, as the stress imposed by tourism activities on fragile ecosystems is still accelerating and could aggravate their depletion.

Although progress has been achieved in ensuring biodiversity and specific legislative measures and actions are in place besides there is still a lack of adequate political will and citizens information, and also a poor implementation of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, and compensation measures in Natura 2000 sites, as result of low quality Appropriate Assessments for small and major projects and lack of enforcement of relevant Environmental Terms. There is still open infringement procedures’ regarding protection measure for the SPA network, and Natura 2000 sites degradation.

Therefore, the present development model of the South Aegean Islands, such as Chalki, Nisyros, Symi and Tilos, is becoming less and less friendly for the biodiversity. But at the same time, the development of tourism though damaging the ecosystems as mentioned above provides a window of opportunity for their preservation. This, because in contrast to other Aegean islands heavily developed through tourism in the last 30 years, Chalki still maintains a character and a natural and cultural landscape of unique beauty, that attracts good quality tourism and has not yet become a heavily developed island. As a consequence, biodiversity is still one of the valuable assets for visitors and this has increased the value of well conserved natural ecosystems, biodiversity and landscapes for the local society.

Thus, there is a wide consensus towards planning and implementation of concerted and well-focused actions for the revitalization of the traditional agro pastoral model, as the driving force for ecosystem and biodiversity preservation and consequently of the most valuable tourism assets of the island. At the same time, interventions related to the preservation of valuable and important for conservation bird colonies have become a priority in the local agenda. Thus, there is a demand for action to re orientate the present land use model in a manner that will enable the sustainable preservation of island ecosystems and landscapes, for the benefit of local economy (mainly quality tourism and ecotourism) 33

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

and biodiversity.

The opportunity exists and the Municipalities of Chalki makes important efforts to pursue the objective of biodiversity preservation on the island, as a key issue, in an attempt to make this Island a model in the Aegean Sea, enhancing nature, biodiversity and sustainable development.

To make this happen, the Municipality has already started a long term process to develop appropriate partnership to plan and implement well focused, adequate and effective management interventions, involving local stakeholders and experts, to demonstrate the feasibility of creating a new combination of agro pastoral activities and nature preservation compatible with the existence and development of sustainable quality tourism and ecotourism activities, and the Eco business and services sector that will enable the island to keep its natural attractions in the long run.

In this context, considering the negative impact of tourism activities in the sustainable use of biological resources and their diversity, it is quite urgent to develop and apply an integrated biodiversity strategy, ensuring Aegean islands local authorities and civil society cooperation and also equilibrium between economy, society and environment, enhancing the high ecological value of Aegean ecosystems, and protecting local biodiversity promoting sustainable use of natural resources in tourism and rural development.

A common strategic project for South Aegean rural and coastal management is more than ever necessary, first to strongly demonstrate the cross border collaboration potential and secondly to give viable answers to common problems and common visions on sustainable development issues, regarding equal opportunities and fair competition.

In order to respond to all above mentioned conditions the proposed Project is a nature and biodiversity oriented project, based on the ecosystems services value. The project site, including the small island of Chalki is the most favorable location to generate and apply innovative measures into Natura sites, linking nature concerns with rural, forest, livestock, grazing, fisheries activities aiming at revitalizing the local economy. This particular area could be a pilot for demonstration projects and best practices in the field of sustainable practices contributing to the Commission Communication on "Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 – and beyond" goals and ensuring European added value, reaching new targets for biodiversity 2020. For these reasons this project has to highlight temporal, spatial and local needs to be met in all biodiversity domains, especially in rural, coastal and marine management, exploitation and governance.

In the same time Chalki could gained experience in order to build new mentalities based on more sustainable production patterns based on the experience of a LIFE project implementation.

In this purpose it is necessary to undertake further efforts in structuring an integrated biodiversity strategy based on a careful assessment of the previous achievements in the field, under LIFE programme, achieving add value, taking into account that cooperation between adjacent islands should be helpful to improve the quality of results to the wider cooperation area compared to that which would be achieved with one partner working alone. Results can also be of relevance and can potentially be transferred to other parts of Aegean Islands.

The rural and coastal South Aegean ecosystems and their surrounding near-shore marine areas constitute unique ecosystems often comprising many plant and animal species that are endemic—found nowhere else on Earth. The legacies of a unique evolutionary history, these ecosystems are irreplaceable treasures. Southern European eco-regions, in general, were delineated based on a bottom-up approach employing both published and unpublished field data and expert assessment.

34

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Name of the project site:

Nisyros Island Surface area (ha): 81450 Surface description (max. 100 chars): Land area 5.010 ha - Marine area: 76.440 ha - Natura 2000 area 99% SPA: X SAC/SCI/pSCI: X

NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210032 NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210007

Other protection status according to national or regional legislation: EU protection status: NAME OF THE SITE: NISOS NISYROS KAI NISIDES SPA NATURA 2000 Code: GR-4210032 (part of the project site) under Directive 79/409/EC SCI NATURA 2000 GR4210007 under Directive 92/43/EU AREA 4730 ha % Natura 4730.8ha/99% REFUGE WILDLIFE 4284ha COD .ΙΒΑ GR167 RWL (Refuge of Wild Life) GR95 Ag. Ioannis Theologou, Lakki, Trapezina.

Main land uses and ownership status of the project area: Nisyros is a volcanic island located in the S. Aegean Sea. In the Municipality of Nisyros belongs several other islets, the largest of which is Yali. It has a total population of 1,008 inhabitants. The island is dominated by the volcano. Traditional terraces cover almost the entire surface of the island with intensive agriculture lasting since the beginning of the 20th century. Nisyros is famous for the abundance of hot ground-water and hot springs along the coast and under sea water. The old baths have now been restored, but not returned to use.

Main activity is the mass tourism and the local pumice quarries on the Yali. The potable water is ensured today by a modern sea water desalination unit. The intense terrain in relation to the island small size limited scope for the development of productive activities. The noticeable geographical isolation and the almost total lack of infrastructure creates an urgent need for improvement of living conditions.

Scientific description of project area: Altitude: Minimum 0, Maximum 680, Mean 189m 10 bird’s species listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC and 9 species, regularly occurring Migratory Birds not listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC. Administrative region of Dodecanese. Biogeographic region Mediterranean.

Also there is one mammal (monachus monachus) listed on Annex II of Council directive 92/43/EEC and one invertebrate (Callimorpha quadripunctaria) listed on Annex II of Council directive 92/43/EEC Habitats: Marine areas, Sea inlets, Heath, Scrub, Maquis and Garrigue, Phygrana, Dry grassland, 35

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Steppes, Alpine and sub-Alpine grassland, Non-forest areas cultivated with woody plants (including Orchards, groves, Vineyards, Dehesas).

According to the Plan, reassessment 69 Important Bird Areas for classification as SPAs for birds / GR4210032 Nisyros Island and islets: Buteo rufinus, Coracias garrulous; Sylvia rueppelli; Emberiza caesia; Phalacrocorax aristotelis; Hieraaetus fasciatus; Falco peregrines.

The Nisyros Island’s vegetation consists mainly of brushwood and maquis. Also, there remains oak forest and diffuse “kokkorevythies” (Pistacia terebinthus), figs, almonds, olives, etc. Croplands constitute a small percentage of the total area of island, while the dominant role played by the central caldera, which has an altitude of 250 - 600 meters Glass Half islet covered by pine woods, while the other half is mine volcanic rocks. The remaining islands are rocky and covered primarily by brushwood.

Habitat Classes Marine areas, Sea Inlets

% Cover 2,98

Heath, Scrub, Maquis and Garrigue, Phygrana

41,13

Dry grassland, Steppes

28,33

Alpine and sub-Alpine grassland Non-forest areas cultivated with woody plants (including Orchards, groves, Vineyards, Dehesas)

Other land (including Towns, Villages, Roads, Waste places, Mines, Industrial sites Waste places, Mines, Industrial sites)

TOTAL HABITAT COVER

1,95 22,34 3,27 100

Nisyros flora and fauna are of a high interest thanks to their volcanic origin and geographical position.

In terms of flora, it constitutes a migration route of Asian species traveling to the Hellenic Territory and Southern Europe in general (in conjunction with other Aegean islands, particularly the ones close to the coastline of Asia Minor). It is situated on the eastern migratory route of birds, being most significant for their migration to Greece and Asia Minor. The recorded presence of 450 flora species, 85 avifauna species and 7 reptile species, as well as the presence of the Monachus-monachus seal on the coast of the island, make this 42,000 - acre island a place worthy of special protection and assessment.

The rich and dense vegetation, astivides (Sacropoterium spinosum), myrtle (Lavandula stoechas), cistaceae (Cistus creticus & Cistus salviifolius), thyme (Thimus capitatus), savory (Satureja thymbra) as well as the tall spanish brooms (Spartium junceum), daphne plants (Daphne gnidioides) and thorny brooms (Calicotome villosa) are only some of the pleasant obstacles that anyone venturing away from the paths will come across. The presence of numerous trees is another special feature that classifies Nisyros as the sole “green” active volcano in the Aegean.

A number of them constitute the island’s remaining self-sown vegetation, such as the Valonia oak (Quercus macrolepis), the Kermes Oak (Quercus coccifera), the turpentine tree (Pistacia terebinthus)

36

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

and the wild olive tree (Olea europaea sylvestris). Fossilized leaves belonging to the wild olive tree were discovered in layers of ash bearing testimony to its existence on Nisyros 60,000 years ago. Most of the trees that exist nowadays on Nisyros have been planted by man (olive, fig, almond, and turpentine trees).

The fauna which is present on the island is equally rich and varied as the flora, and provides pleasant company to the hiker during long walks. While walking on Nisyros, one cannot avoid making friends with the "kourkoutavli" (Agame stelio), the huge ashen grey lizards, which scurry to hide under the lava or in between the dry rock walls, the large spiders that block your path with their strong webs, the "cyani" of Aristotle - the beautiful cyan-colored magpies (chalkokourouna) that are annoyed as you pass by them , and the hawks continuously hovering in the sky.

The specific vegetation of the crater site (Ramos-Lakki): Vegetation in the crater site has been ravaged following the latest volcanic climax of 1873-1877.

Nowadays, vegetation in the area (of brushwood type) is grown on earth made up of caldera fill material, both classic sediments, and silt currents containing fragments of altered basalts originating from hydrothermal explosions. A specific feature of these brushwood’s is their dwarf size; this can be attributed both to earth composition and to its high temperature, a result of the intense hydrothermal activity in the area. The dwarf - like species comprising vegetation of the specific area are the following: • Briar (Erica manipuliflora) • Rock rose (Cistus creticus και C. salviifolius) • Thyme(Thymus capitatus) Briar surprisingly pioneers in the reforestation of the crater area. The reforestation capability of this species has been also demonstrated in other similar cases where initial vegetation has been ravaged.

Several graminaceous and herbaceous plants grow among brushwoods. There are also sporadic appearances of single shrubs i.e. Calycotome villosa, gorse and glastroi.

A new taxon and a new species In summer 1974, a research team from the University of Patras (professor Dim. Phitos and asst. Styl.

Papatsou) located the subspecies ammophilon of species Limonium graecum on Nisyros, as well as a new species: Campanula nisyria.. i) Limonium graecum (Poiret) Rech. fil. op. cit. ssp. ammophilon Papatsou et Phitos, ssp. nov.

Ammophilon subspecies is a geographically isolated form that differs from other subspecies of L. graecum, mainly because its bracts are fluffy and large, as well as for its unmistakably lance shaped leaves. Secondary distinguishing features of the above subspecies are the multitude of bare lateral buds and sparse cobs.

A cytological test on ammophilon samples taken from the sandy coasts of Yali, indicated a chromosome number 2n=42, meaning that polyploidy is manifested by this subspecies. It is remarkable that this chromosome number is observed in the Limonium gene for the first time. ii) Campanula nisyria Papatsou et Phitos, sp. nov.

Campanula nisyria is a biannual or perennial. It is wholly covered by long fluff and has a singular bud,

37

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

70 cm or longer, occasionally creating thin branches. Leaves at the base of the plant are ovoid with crenate or serrated ends; their length exceeds 22 cm. Campanula nisyria flowers are largely acquiescent; only in rare instances do they feature a rudimentary stem. They are characteristically grouped in herring bone-like clusters where flowers grow individually or in multitudinous groups. In particular, their flower cup comprises triangular - ovoid sepals, creating small eyelashes at the circumference of the lamella. The corolla comprises large petals grown together in a tube approximately 20 mm long and a diameter of nearly 11 mm in the middle, tailing into small lobes. Corolla color varies from purple to violet. Finally, each flower features a five chamber ovary and five stigmata.

The morphology characters and the geographic expansion of Campanula nisyria indicate a close cognation to the group of species: Campanula lyrata, C. hagielia, C. betonicaefolia, C. sporadum and C. iconia, spread on the eastern island of Aegean and Asia Minor (Phitos, 1965). In particular, there are explicit phylogenetic relationships between Campanula nisyria and the two species mentioned first above, whereas the former could be described as a variation of the latter.

Campanula nisyria is one of the most distinctive elements of Nisyros' flora.

Geobotanical position of Nisyros In geobotanical terms, Nisyros is considered part of the eastern botanic section of Aegean Sea (Rechinger, 1950).

Oriental elements are widely represented, i.e.: Aristolochia hirta A. parvifolia Nigella arvensis ssp. glauca Papaver gracile Trifolium pilulare T. argutum Convolvulus scammonia Scrophularia canina ssp. floribunda Campanula nisyria Of the above mentioned species, Campanula nisyria is endemic and is solely restricted to Nisyros; yet it belongs to the C. lyrata group whose geographic spread is typically eastern - Aegean. Papaver grackle species is known from Asia Minor; with respect to the Aegean region, it was first identified on Nisyros.

Geographic expansion of Nigella arvensis ssp. glauca (Strid, 1970) coincides with the expansion of Campanula lyrata taxon; it is typical of the eastern botanical region of the Aegean. Trifolium pilulare and T. argutum species are also typical of eastern Aegean. Finally, Limonium hirsuticalyx is another oriental botanic element; it is also known from Rhodes and Kos

Importance of the project area for biodiversity and/or for the conservation of the species / habitat types targeted at regional, national and EU level (give quantitative information if possible): The present development model of South Aegean Islands is becoming less and less friendly for the biodiversity of the islands. But at the same time, the development of tourism though damaging the ecosystems provides a window of opportunity for their preservation. This, because in contrast to other Aegean islands heavily developed through tourism in the last 30 years, Nisyros still maintains a character and a natural and cultural landscape of unique beauty, that attracts good quality tourism and has not yet become a heavily developed island. As a consequence, biodiversity is still one of the valuable assets for visitors and this has increased the value of well conserved natural ecosystems, biodiversity and landscapes for the local society.

Main characteristics of the island is the intense terrain in relation to its small size, limited the possibilities

38

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

for the development of productive activities, the resulting problems of organization of land and water resources deficiency. The noticeable geographical isolation and the almost total lack of infrastructure create an urgent need for improvement of living conditions and the lifting of quarantine. The result reflected: a) the increased costs of production and distribution of products, infrastructure and operation of services, the increased transportation time; b) in depressed development opportunities in relation to investments and entrepreneurship, training, information and focused information, health, social life etc, restrictions relating to the natural and man-made environment; c) the increased fragility and sensitivity of ecosystems and the man-made environment just because of their limited size.

The relatively small scale and extremely wide diversity of human activities and the peculiar perception and behavior of the population in relation to space, but also the Island as tank capacity cultural and natural heritage, is shaping a peculiar dynamics and complexity of relationships of the island population with the sea.

The relatively limited availability of productive resources, accentuated with extremely large seasonal variations of human potential and of the economic activities. In addition, the natural discontinuity of space creates problems in coherence, the functionality and the integration (with the concept of integration of individual units-systems) of the economic and social area.

The spatial discontinuity significantly affects the interfaces and operations, product and labor markets, the choice of location of activities, competition and pricing, the cost of production, transport and communications, etc.

The small population involves little market and therefore little local demand for goods and services, while at the same time makes it impossible to create economies of scale and concentration – necessary components to reduce costs for businesses and households. The small area, which contains a restriction on natural resources and lack of hinterland, make an extremely fragile environmental balance, which needs a specific environmental management.

In the same time Nisyros is the younger of the major active volcanoes in Greece. The age of the oldest rocks that can be seen here is almost 160,000 years; the newest of them date almost to the prehistoric ages, approximately 20,000 years ago. The first volcanic eruptions in the greater area of Nisyros, on the eastern extremity of the South Aegean volcanic arc, are dated 3.4 million years ago. Since that time, the main part of western Kos as well as the islets of Pyrgousa, Pahia, Strongili and Yali around Nisyros, and the latter itself, were formed through minor or major eruptions. The time when the creation of the underwater foundations of Nisyros began is not precisely known. It is certain that it took a few tens of thousands of years of underwater volcanic activity until the first peak of the island rose above the waters of Aegean, approximately 150,000 years ago. After emerging from the sea, the volcano started to form a terrestrial cone.

A large volcanic cone was formed above the sea level over the next 100,000 years, a product of the succession of tephra and lava layers. Its diameter was around seven (7) kilometers; peak height was 700 meters.

Volcanic hazard and risk in the Nisyros region necessitate the operation of a permanent Volcano Observatory, with integrated networks monitoring the physical-chemical parameters of the volcano, thus permitting timely short-term forecast of reactivation, and implementation of measures to protect 39

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

inhabitants and visitors. This has been one of the prime targets of a project called "Promotion of the Nisyros Volcano", under the coordination of Nisyros Municipality, which was financed by the South Aegean Regional Authority, with additional funding through the 3rd European Community Support Framework.

The Volcano Observatory is housed in the old Emporio Elementary School building, which has been appropriately restored in the framework of the project to accommodate the Observatory. The building is at an exceptional position for its purpose, on the verge of the caldera, having direct visual contact with the caldera floor, as well as with the hydrothermal craters. It also has visual contact with Yali where similar monitoring systems have also been installed. The main hall of the Observatory has been configured to hold presentations, lectures or workshops; it can accommodate 50 persons.

The hot springs are another characteristic feature of Nisyros. Hot water wells up at many points along the coast, at temperatures varying from 30 to 61 degrees. The water is a mixture of sea and rain water with the geothermal fluids of the upper hot reservoir. They come to the surface (being hotter and lighter) through the big fractures and faults in the area. They subsequently float higher than the cooler, denser seawater; hence hot springs commonly occur close to the coast. =The best known of the hot springs are those of Loutra, 1500 metres north of Mantraki, and of Thermiani to the north of the village of Pali. Both belong in the class of ‘healing hydro- sulphur salt water springs’.

On the northern coast, at the foot of the mountain, lies a cave where the ailing come to be cured, stay for a fair length of time and then depart, their health restored. The most recent period when a spa operated in the region was from 1895 to the beginning of the 1930’s, the celebrated ‘Pantelidi Baths’.

The old baths have now been restored, but not returned to use. The temperature of the spring is 33 degrees, but it is expected to rise by 8 to 10 degrees if the water is pumped. The waters of the hot spring of Loutra have been exploited since 1872 by the Mandraki Public Baths.

They are celebrated for their therapeutic properties in the treatment of rheumatism, arthritis, skin complaints and circulatory problems. The spring’s maximum temperature is 46 degrees. A third well known spring is that in the bay of Avlaki. Its waters were used for therapeutic purposes until the village was abandoned. The hot spring still bubbles up through the sea water; its highest temperature is 61 degrees. In addition to hot springs, Nisyros is home to several sites where hot steam is produced. Two of these were utilized in the past as natural saunas.

The one at Pyria is the main one (and known from the ancient ages). The hot bath chamber and its ancillary buildings are still intact. The other site is at the entrance to the Emporio conurbation. Steam develops a temperature of 34-35°C Nisyros flora and fauna are of high interest thanks to their volcanic origin and geographical position. In terms of flora, it constitutes a migration route of Asian species traveling to the Hellenic Territory and Southern Europe in general (in conjunction with other Aegean islands, particularly the ones close to the coastline of Asia Minor).

It is situated on the eastern migratory route of birds, being most significant for their migration to Greece and Asia Minor. The recorded presence of 450 flora species, 85 avifauna species and 7 reptile species, as well as the presence of the Monachus-monachus seal on the coast of the island, make this 42,000 acre island a place worthy of special protection and assessment.

The rich and dense vegetation, astivides (Sacropoterium spinosum), myrtle (Lavandula stoechas), cistaceae (Cistus creticus & Cistus salviifolius), thyme (Thimus capitatus), savory (Satureja thymbra) as well as the tall spanish brooms (Spartium junceum), daphne plants (Daphne gnidioides) and thorny brooms (Calicotome villosa) are only some of the pleasant obstacles that anyone venturing away from 40

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

the paths will come across. The presence of numerous trees is another special feature that classifies Nisyros as the sole “green” active volcano in the Aegean.

A number of them constitute the island’s remaining self-sown vegetation, such as the Valonia oak (Quercus macrolepis), the Kermes Oak (Quercus coccifera), the turpentine tree (Pistacia terebinthus) and the wild olive tree (Olea europaea sylvestris). Fossilized leaves belonging to the wild olive tree were discovered in layers of ash bearing testimony to its existence on Nisyros 60,000 years ago.

Most of the trees that exist nowadays on Nisyros have been planted by man (olive, fig, almond, and turpentine trees). The fauna which is present on the island is equally rich and varied as the flora, and provides pleasant company to the hiker during long walks. While walking on Nisyros, one cannot avoid making friends with the "kourkoutavli" (Agame stelio), the huge ashen grey lizards, which scurry to hide under the lava or in between the dry rock walls, the large spiders that block your path with their strong webs, the "cyani" of Aristotle - the beautiful cyan-colored magpies (chalkokourouna) that are annoyed as you pass by them -, and the hawks continuously hovering in the sky.

41

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

Name of the project site:

SOUTH AEGEAN SMALL ISLANDS: CHALKI, NISYROS, SYMI, TILOS AND SURROUNDING MARINE AREA Surface area (ha): 322000 Surface description (max. 100 chars): Total Land area: 20950,00 ha Total Marine area: 301050,00 ha Natura 2000 (SPA & SAC: 21037,10 ha SPA: X SAC/SCI/pSCI: X

NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210024, GR4210025, GR4210026, GR4210032 NATURA 2000 Code: GR4210007

Other protection status according to national or regional legislation: In this Project total area are includes particular sites, concerning the islands of Chalki, Nisyros, Symi and Tilos, as they are described in separetly forms.

Other protection status: CHALKI NISYROS: REFUGE WILDLIFE 4284ha COD ΙΒΑ GR167 SYMI: 92/43/EU REFUGE WILDLIFE COD .ΙΒΑ GR167 TILOS: GR168 92/43/EU - WILDLIFE REFUGE 4935ha / Corine Biotopes region, A / One Important Bird Areas (IBAs - International Designation Code IN06): Main land uses and ownership status of the project area: The South Aegean Small Islands, with relatively small geographical size, face population reduction, serious infrastructure deficiencies, problematic use of resources, all leading to noticeable geographical isolation and developmental problems. They have been managed in a sustainable way for centuries contributing to the preservation of the high levels of the islands biodiversity, due to an extensive and low input model and other small scale activities such as bee keeping, fishing or small scale tourism supporting a subsistence economy, with of small agricultural lots producing either fodder crops or local crop varieties for local consumption.

This model persisted for centuries, resulting in well preserved mountain ecosystems with scrublands and pasturelands of high quality, under low grazing pressure as it is also the case for the wetland ecosystems.

Thirty years ago, this model started collapsing, changes disrupted the rotational and nomadic pastoralism model.

Scientific description of project area: The South Aegean region spans a huge maritime area off the coast of Attica (Makronissos Beach) to the southern coast of Turkey (Kastelorizo). It consists of 79 Islands, of which inhabited the 48 and 178

42

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

islets. The total area is 5,286 km2. (4% of the surface of Greece) and its population is 308.610 inhabitants (census 2011 base). It consists of the prefectures of the Cyclades and the Dodecanese.

The South Aegean region is divided into 13 Regional Sections consisting of 34 municipalities are selfgoverning territorial public entities and constitute the first degree local self-government. Demographic data of the population of the South Aegean region, according to the Census of 2011, is 308.610 people, more specifically 190.770 inhabit the Dodecanese and 117.840 the Cyclades. Demographic evolution of the region between the years 1971-2011 presents a development of the class of 48,81%, respectively, the development of individual Counties for the same period is around 36,44% for the Cyclades and 57,64% for the Dodecanese. In general the physiognomy of this space is uniform, characterised by fragmentation and the great variety of islands of different sizes and characteristics.

The Prefecture of the Dodecanese is poor in mineral wealth underground, except a few exceptions and intense tight water and energy resources, but as having a comparative advantage the rich natural and cultural resources. As to the hydrological characteristics of the region, unfortunately the small area of the Islands, the little rainfall that accept many of the Islands and the mountainous item, do not allow the development of valuable hydrologic basins resulting in small font size and water reserves. Seismic hazard in terms of the South Aegean region belongs primarily in zone II. Essentially, the greater part of the islands of the Dodecanese belongs to a highly earthquake-prone region of Greece; while in less earthquake-prone region belong to the other islands of the Dodecanese and the Cyclades.

In recent decades many coastlines in various islands have been altered by anthropogenic activities and construction (buildings, opening up coastal roads, various small and large port projects etc.), as well as pollution of the sea by solid and liquid wastes like municipal waste (including those from the Asia minor coast) and waste from passing ships and ships of the coasters. This causes corrosion in some coastal areas and coastal sediment deposition in some others, creating similar problems in the use of coastal areas.

In the South Aegean region dominates the mild temperate Mediterranean climate. Shows average temperatures, ranging between 11 ° c and 28 ° c, while the winds are mainly northerners, with tension and during the summer months (winds). The average temperature of the cooler month (January) is 1012 ° c and the warmest (July or August) 24,5-26,5 ° c.

As to the level of rainfall, although some islands are occasionally relatively appreciable rainfall in General rainfall is insufficient to meet their needs, especially during the summer months.

Natural Environment – Ecosystems The natural environment in the region is characterized by the prevalence of important ecosystems which, on the one hand, absent the thick and high vegetation and, on the other hand, is strong-impact of the sea.

Specifically, the following are basic types of ecosystems makkias fryganika, forests and woodland, pasture land, coastal and marine ecosystems. A large part of the area has been recognized by the scientific community as ecologically significant. This is a total of 31 sites that have been proposed for inclusion in NATURA network 2000 and in Corine Biotopes and a total of 39 substantial wetlands that are recorded on the basis of Greek wetlands data base.

It should be noted that the region has a significant number of biotopes, but significant changes have been undergone. Nonetheless, they retain their importance both for ecological reasons and the possibility and opportunities for the development of specialized tourism activities. The value of lifelong learning and the world of the Aegean islands located in the rousing present currency all of flora and

43

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

fauna. As we all know, Greece became distinguished for about 5,500 species of plants, of which 750 are present around financially.

In the South Aegean region, due to long drought periods, the brief period of rainfall, intense sunshine, dominates the vegetation, the brushwood, while a smaller percentage meet pine forests with coniferous trees, such as several species of pines, cypresses and Cedars depending on the region.

Terrestrial wetland streams, rivers, lakes, swamps, reeds, rushes, trees and willows are also encountered.

But the lack of soil, increased salinity and isolation create highly sensitive conditions for plants and animals. As regards the fauna of the region, characteristic feature are the great diversity and rarity. Of the 115 species of mammals of the Greek fauna some of the rarest lives in the Aegean region. The Dama-dama, also known as Rhodian deer, has few animals, which live in the forests of Rhodes.

The marine waters of the Aegean Sea is generally poor in variety of animal organisms, but nevertheless encountered species in both the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, red and the Indian Ocean. 447 species of fish and thousands of species of other organisms are recorded, such as starfish, sea urchins, clams, mussels, oysters. They also have recorded 17 species of marine mammals such as the Mediterranean Monk Seal (Monachus-monachus), with a population not exceeding 350 people, dolphins called “zwnodelfino” and “stachtodelfino”, that are rare in the Aegean sea and the porpoise, while very rarely occur and some kinds of whales. In that regard, the Aegean Sea birds nesting many bird species which are not meet to other parts of Europe, such as the cinereous Bunting and crupper’s Nuthatch.

Also the bearded vulture has little people.

The South Aegean region development model, that has prevailed in recent decades, present a dramatic reduction with the participation of primary sector of production contributing to the Gross Regional Product, as well as to employment. The physical configuration of the region has a significant impact on the structure of production areas, constituting a factor determining the shape and pace of development.

The dominance of services, it is clear in the South Aegean region, gathering for 2006, 82.1% of the Dodecanese. Here are by far the sector of industry and construction, while agriculture occupies a small percentage. On the developmental trend and the level of development, the two spatial sections outweigh compared to other country.

Concerning the fishing activities it is estimate that workers in the collectible fishing amounted to about 4,700 people, while the total number of dependents from fishing is amounted over 9.400 people. A gradual reduction of workers found in the collector's fishing is observed. The average age of fishermen is the 42 years, while older fishermen working mainly in the small and coastal fishing. In a very small percentage (< 3%) vessels involved and women fish workers, while the last years women increasingly participate as owners of fishing vessels. Almost all fishermen are insured. The collector's fishing in the wider region of South Aegean Region is poly-specific and multi-collector and in the majority of cases is done with traditional methods of low profitability and capitalisation.

Therefore, management of fish stocks is quite difficult, complicated and costly. From an economic point of view the fisheries sector is vulnerable to different factors relating to both the ability to ensure satisfactory production and market conditions. Transient low fishing yields, unforeseen increases in operating costs (high fuel prices), problems associated with finding a suitable experienced staff aggravate the sustainability of industry professionals.

The coasts in the South Aegean belong to wider water mass defined as ‘Water bodies in the outer Deinaro-Tauric arc’. This unity includes water bodies that are significantly influenced by the typical hyper-oligotrophic water mass of the eastern Mediterranean. The area is known as a hot spot of 44

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

biodiversity. In order to manage in a sustainable way the biodiversity of South Aegean a large network of Natura sites was established The status of the stocks over the last thirty years presents trend due to breakthrough technology in fishing gear and other means. The reduction of fishing capacity with the implementation of Community regulations fleet management reduces to some extent the pressure on fish stocks, although enough time required implementation of each management plan to establish the real results of stock populations. Continuous assessment of the situation of the fishery resources of the region, the study of management proposals for their sustainability, the possible protection of special areas of their operation are necessary steps for the sustainability of such stocks.

Estimates for stocks in the Greek seas are limited and based on data gathered in the context of research projects financed from regional, national and community resources with the result that the General information which have to be discontinuous and geographically localized. In order to access the sustainability of fish stocks in the region should be done at regular intervals of the capacity study and appreciation of this excess fishing capacity in the region.

Importance of the project area for biodiversity and/or for the conservation of the species / habitat types targeted at regional, national and EU level (give quantitative information if possible): The project area of South Aegean region Small Islands (Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos) is a very important one for the conservation of the species/habitat types and for the biodiversity issues targeted at regional, national and EU level.

These islands, with relatively small geographical size, face population reduction, serious infrastructure deficiencies and problematic use of resources leading to a noticeable geographical and functional isolation which provide serious developmental problems.

The small islands ecosystems of South Aegean Region, in general, have been managed in a sustainable way for centuries which contributed to the preservation of the high levels of the islands biodiversity. This management was related to an extensive and low input model (combining low intensity farming with extensive livestock keeping) and other small scale activities such as bee keeping, fishing or small scale tourism. This combination supported a subsistence economy, with of small agricultural lots producing either fodder crops or local crop varieties for local consumption.

This model persisted for centuries, resulting in well preserved mountain ecosystems with scrublands and pasturelands of high quality, under low grazing pressure, capable of supporting a wide range of biodiversity, including local endemic plants, passerine birds and birds of prey. The wetland ecosystems of the islands, being also part of the extensive pastoralist model, were also preserved in good quality, providing valuable habitat for migratory water birds, as well as for local biodiversity such as bats, terrapins and passerines.

Thirty years ago, this model started collapsing, as is the case in most southern European regions.

Changes disrupted the rotational and nomadic pastoralist model. As a result, animals are kept on the mountain or in secluded pasturelands in the rest of the island, year round, overgrazing the habitat and resulting in the degradation of shrub lands and forestlands all over the island. The EU subsidies of the last 30 years have resulted in increased numbers of animals on site and thus to a larger overgrazing problem.

At the same time, the invasion of mass tourism had as a consequence the total abandonment of 45

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

marginal agricultural cultivations in terraces, which had already stopped supporting he nomadic pastoralists and thus were of no value for the farmers. These cultivations used to provide valuable foraging habitats for resident and migratory birds. Tourism had another negative impact: due to the expansion of housing at the coastal area, it destroyed or degraded the remaining island wetlands.

Tourism also brings visitors to remote and uninhabited islets and rocky coastline, where important colonies of seabirds, the Eleonora’s falcon, and populations of rare plants are found.

The South Aegean Islands face common challenges, relating to the fact that their economies now mostly depend on tourism. This has a negative impact on the environment and island biodiversity, requiring common strategies and solutions. Unsustainable production and consumption patterns, still characterize rural and coastal management of the Aegean ecosystems. As a result of extensive urban pressures and massive tourism, cutting down forests (for resources or to expand city borders), overgrazing, overfishing and massive tourist resort building construction have taken a great toll on the islands environment.

Moreover, these Islands, which are Natura 2000 sites, these last 3 years faced a radical decrees of the fishing product, due to the augmentation of sea mammal members (dolphins and monk seals) and of the lagocephalus fish, which deplete the fishermen’ catches and destroy their fishing gear, consequently increasing their expenses and diminishing their gains also causing serious problems to fishes’ diversity.

Unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, while depleting local biodiversity, affect, at the same time, the local economy, society and the quality of life. The persistence of pollution, the climate change, the misuse of hunting or fishing privileges, and the direct or indirect introduction of non-native species into locals habitat, all threaten the island biodiversity.

Tourism is one of the world’s fastest growing industries as well as the major source of foreign exchange earnings and employment, and it is increasingly focusing on natural environments. Tourism can contribute in a positive way to socio-economic development but, but at the same time, its fast and uncontrolled growth can be the major cause of environmental degradation and loss of local identity and traditional culture. The stress imposed by tourism on the South Aegean fragile ecosystems is still growing and could lead to their depletion.

Although progress has been made in safeguarding biodiversity, and relevant legislative rules and measures are in place, there is still a lack of political will and citizen’s information and awareness.

Added to these is a poor implementation of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, and total lack of reparation measures for Natura 2000 sites. Those are due to low quality or lack of Appropriate Environmental Assessments for small and major projects, as well as a lack of enforcement of the relevant Environmental Terms. There are still pending infringement measures regarding the protection of SPA and Natura 2000 site degradation.

Therefore, the present development model of South Aegean Islands, Tilos, Nisyros and Symi, is becoming less and less friendly towards the biodiversity of the islands. But at the same time, the development of tourism, albeit its ecosystem damages, provides a window of opportunity for their preservation. This is, because in contrast to other Aegean islands, Tilos, Nisyros and Symi still maintain a natural and cultural landscape of unique beauty, that attracts good quality tourism and has not yet become spoiled by excessive tourist development. As a consequence, biodiversity is still one of the valuable assets especially for visitors and this has the potential to increase the value of well-preserved natural ecosystems, biodiversity and landscapes in the eyes of local society.

Characteristic of these islands is the rugged terrain, which in relation to their small size, limits scope of productive activities, resulting in problems of land distribution and water management (resource

46

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2a

deficiency).

The noticeable geographical isolation and the lack of infrastructure creates an urgent need for improvement of living conditions for the local population and the “lifting of quarantine” regarding these islands.

Today we can observe the following: (a) An increased cost in the production and distribution of products, in infrastructure and operation of services, and inefficient as well as very slow transportation/movement of goods and people. (b) Depressed development opportunities regarding: investments and entrepreneurship, training, information, health, social life, (c) The increased fragility and sensitivity of ecosystems as well as of the man-made environment due to its limited size.

The relatively small scale and extremely wide diversity of human activities and the peculiar perception and behavior of the population in relation to space, but also the Islands cultural and natural heritage, are shaping peculiar dynamics and complex of relationships between the island population and the sea. The relatively limited availability of productive resources, accentuated the large seasonal variations of human populations and the economic activities in those islands. In addition, the natural discontinuity of space creates problems in coherence, the functionality and the integration (with the concept of integration of individual units-systems) of the economic and social area.

The spatial discontinuity significantly affects the interfaces and operations, product and labour markets, the choice of location of activities, competition and pricing, the cost of production, transport and communications, etc.

The small population is a small consumer market with limited demand for goods and services, making economies of scale impossible – thus impossible to reduce costs for businesses and households.

The small island area, which contains restricted natural resources and a lack of hinterland, make for an extremely fragile environmental balance, which needs a very specific environmental management.

Description of species / habitats / biodiversity issues targeted by the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) South Aegean Small Islands are considered to be among the most important Aegean islands for biodiversity, hosting nationally and EU wide important populations for birds such as Falco eleonorae (about 5% of the national population and 3% of the global population breed here), 3.75% of the national breeding population of Larus audouinii and 3% of Greek national breeding population and 0.5% of the subspecies EU population of Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii, as also of Sylvia rueppelli, buteo rufinus, caracias garrules, and emberiza caesia (Nisyros island).

The islands are the most important breeding site for Bonelli’s eagle in Greece, hosting 5 pairs of the species (of the 100-140 pairs breeding in Greece). In addition, Calonectris diomedea, Puffinus yelkouan, Coracias garrulous, and Emberiza caesia have very good populations in the area. A number of reptile species and many invertebrates such as Lepidoptera species are giving further biodiversity value. Flora of South Aegean Small Islands is very rich and 5 taxa are endemic and have been included in the Greek red Data Book. Nisyros and Tilos coastal and marine area are considered important for sea mammals such as the Monk Seal Monachus monachus and Larus audouinii Audouin's Gull Biodiversity of Tilos, according to factsheets of

NATURA 2000 and IBA: SITE GR4210024 /

47

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2c

SITENAME: NISOS TILOS KAI NISIDES: ANTITILOS, PELEKOUSA, GAIDOURONISI, GIAKOUMIS, AGIOS ANDREAS, PRASOUDA, NISI [Longitude 27.371944 Latitude 36.430833AREA (HA) 6334.7100 Altitude : Maximum 600 Mean 165, administrative region Dodekanisos biogeographic region: Mediterranean 24 bird species, listed on annex i of council directive 79/409/eec and 39 species on regularly occurring migratory birds not listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC. 6300 ha of the IBA are covered by Special Protection Area (SPA).

Annex I of the European Union Habitats Directive 92/43/EC contains many habitat types found on the island (they consist of habitat types requiring protection) and/or in Corine.

Table of habitat types that are found on Tilos, for those who love or study nature.

Code Habitat types & Flora species per habitat type (92/43/EC) 1120*

Posidonia beds (Posidonion oceanicae)

1210

Annual vegetation of drift lines

1240

Vegetated sea cliffs of the Mediterranean coasts with endemic Limonium spp. Limonium ocymifolium , Trigonella rechingeri

2110 5330

Embryonic shifting dunes, Elymus farctus (Agropyron junceum), Otanthus maritimus, Anthemis tomentosa, Eryngium maritimum, Pancratium maritimum Thermo-Mediterranean and pre-desert scrub, Euphorbia dendroides 5420 Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas Medicago heyniana , Quercus aucheri, Verbascum mykales, Verbascum symes

5340

Thicket with oak, Quercus aucheri

5420

Sarcopoterium spinosum phryganas; Medicago heyniana; Quercus aucheri; Verbascum mykales; Verbascum symes

8210

Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation; Campanula hagielia; Dianthus fruticosus subsp. Rhodius

8217

Limestone rocks of Aegean; Allium archeotrichum; Anthemis scopulorum; Fibigia lunarioides

8310

Caves not open to the public

8330

Submerged or partially submerged sea caves

9320

Olea and Ceratonia forests

9350

Quercus macrolepis forests; Quercus macrolepis

1120*

Posidonia beds (Posidonion oceanicae)

3170*

Mediterranean temporary ponds

48

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2c

6220*

Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea, TheroBrachypodietea

92D0

Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae) Nerio-Tamariceteae, Securigerion tinctoriae

Coastal wetlands and sand dunes The small wetland (0,2 acres) of Livadia on the island of Tilos is of a great importance, but it is constantly shrinking due to human intervention and tourism infrastructure pressures. Habitat code 3170.

Protection and conservation of the wetland can be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness.

Relatively extensive sand dunes structures in Eristos and Skafi, are a common habitat in Greece.

Shrinking due to human activities associated with tourism development on sandy beaches. Protection and conservation is necessary, not only because of the wetland and sand dunes’ biodiversity but also because of their importance as natural mechanisms of flood control against sea level rise.

Sea Life The marine world around Tilos Island is very rich. The visitors to the sea-bed will encounter numerous Sandsmelts (Atherinomorus lacunosus), 2 species of Squaretail rabbitfish (Siganus luridus and Siganus rivulatus), Reticulated leatherjackets (Stephanolepis diaspros), 3 species of Mullets (Sargocentron hastatus, Dussumieria acuta and Leiognathus lunzingeri) and the Fish hedgehog (Lagocephalus spadiceus). Tuna also is present (Thunnus alalunga, Thunnus thunnus) and Bonitos (Katsuwonus pelamis), which face overfishing problems. The presence of the rare Moonfish (Mola mola) is also important in Tilos waters.

Nisyros Altitude: Minimum 0, Maximum 680, Mean 189m 10 birds species listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC 9 species, regularly occurring Migratory Birds not listed on Annex I of Council directive 79/409/EEC One mammal (monachus monachus) listed on Annex II of Council directive 92/43/EEC One invertebrate (Callimorpha quadripunctaria) listed on Annex II of Council directive 92/43/EEC Habitats: Marine areas, Sea inlets , Heath, Scrub, Maquis and Garrigue, Phygrana Dry grassland, Steppes , Alpine and sub-Alpine grassland ,Non-forest areas cultivated with woody plants (including Orchards, groves, Vineyards, Dehesas), Other land (including Towns, Villages, Roads, Waste places, Mines, Industrial sites) Also there is a RWL (Refuge of Wild Life) GR95 Ag. Ioannis Theologou, Lakki, Trapezina.

According to the Plan, 69 Important Bird Areas are classified as SPAs for birds.

Development of action plans for the protection of priority species and Kastritis T. (2009). Action Plan for the Special Protection Area «GR4210032 Nisos Nisyros kai nisides» GR4210032 Nisyros Island and islets - Action Plan o Buteo rufinus o Coracias garrulous 49

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2c

o o o o o

Sylvia rueppelli Emberiza caesia Phalacrocorax aristotelis Hieraaetus fasciatus Falco peregrines

PRESSURES         

Poaching Hunting (illegal or excessive) Land abandonment of traditional crop tourism (not sustainable, massive model) fisheries (unlawful excessive) bonfires pasture oak forest logging Residential development, Rock mining in Glass

A new taxon and a new species In summer 1974, a research team from the University of Patras (professor Dim. Phitos and prof. Styl.

Papatsou) are located the subspecies ammophilon of species Limonium graecum on Nisyros, as well as a new species: i) Limonium graecum (Poiret) Rech. fil. op. cit. ssp. ammophilon Papatsou et Phitos, ssp. nov.

Ammophilon subspecies is a geographically isolated form that differs from other subspecies of L. graecum, mainly because its bracts are fluffy and large, as well as for its unmistakably lance shaped leaves. Secondary distinguishing features of the above subspecies are the multitude of bare lateral buds and sparse cobs.

A cytological test on ammophilon samples taken from the sandy coasts of Yali, indicated a chromosome number 2n=42, meaning that polyploidy is manifested by this subspecies. It is remarkable that this chromosome number is observed in the Limonium gene for the first time. ii) Campanula nisyria Papatsou and Phitos, sp. nov.

Campanula nisyria is a biannual or perennial. It is wholly covered by long fluff and has a singular bud, 70 cm or longer, occasionally creating thin branches. Leaves at the base of the plant are ovoid with crenated or serrated ends; their length exceeds 22 cm.

Campanula nisyria flowers are largely acaulescent; only in rare instances do they feature a rudimentary stem. They are characteristically grouped in herring bone-like clusters where flowers grow individually or in multitudinous groups. In particular, their flower cup comprises triangular - ovoid sepals, creating small eyelashes at the circumference of the lamella. The corolla comprises large petals grown together in a tube approximately 20 mm long and a diameter of nearly 11 mm in the middle, tailing into small lobes.

Corolla color varies from purple to violet. Finally, each flower features a five chamber ovary and five stigmata.

The morphology characters and the geographic expansion of Campanula nisyria indicate a close cognation to the group of species: Campanula lyrata, C. hagielia, C. betonicaefolia, C. sporadum and C.

50

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B2c

iconia, spread on the eastern island of Aegean and Asia Minor (Phitos, 1965). In particular, there are explicit phylogenetic relationships between Campanula nisyria and the two species mentioned first above, whereas the former could be described as a variation of the latter.

Campanula nisyria is one of the most distinctive elements of Nisyros' flora.

Symi Island and the surrounding isllets are included in Natura 2000 network and in archelogical protection status.

Habitats: Artificial landscapes (5%, Arable land; other urban and industrial areas; Perennial crops, orchards and groves; Ruderal land), Coastline/rocky areas (25%, Rock stacks and islets; Scree and boulders; Sea cliffs and rocky shores), Forest (20%, Native coniferous woodland), Sea/marine area (5%, Open Sea; Sea inlets and coastal features), Shrubland (55%, Sclerophyllous scrub, garrigue and maquis) Birds This is an important site for seabirds.Larus audouinii Audouin's Gull and Falco eleonorae Eleonora's Falcon

Provide this information for those species / habitat types or biodiversity issue directly targeted by the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) Habitat types.

The most important of the existing types are the Mediterranean temporary ponds at the village of Livadia (Tilos), the wetland of Pseudo-steppe with grasses and annuals of the Thero-Brachypodietea near the coasts of Eristos and the region of Missaria and Skafi and the Embryonic shifting dunes at the beach of Eristos and - in small range - other beaches of the island, as that of Skafi which repsresent the first stage of dunes formation. In the past, two natural wetlands existed on the island at the sites of Stolous in Megalo Horio and in Livadia.

Endemic and rare species.

More than 450 plant species exist only in in Tilos; some of them common to the whole of Western Europe, whilst others purely Mediterranean. The species that flourish in Tilos are the Jerusalem sage (Phlomis floccosa), the Medick lucerne (Medicago heyniana Greuter), the Mullein (Verbascum), the Bellflower (Campanula simulans Carlstrรถm), a lot of orchids (8 species of Ophrys and 4 species of Serapias), the Mount Tabor oak (Quercus ithaburensis subsp. Macrolepis) and 5 more species of oak, a lot of rakis (gramithia) which are widespread around the island, the Sea pancratium lily (Pancratium maritimum), the Sea eryngo (Eryngium maritimum) at Eristos beach, wild tea (Sideritis curvidens) and the ladinos (7 species of Trifolium).

The following species have been included in the Greek Red List of threatened plants (IUCN list) Leontice leontopetalum subsp. leontopetalum (VU) Medicago heyniana (VU) 51

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

Origanum calcaratum (GREEK ENDEMIC) (VU) Roemeria hybrida subsp. hybrida (VU) Silene holzmannii (AEGEAN ENDEMIC) (EN) Fauna.

The long-term isolation of les islands from other populations has resulted in the creation of unique endemic forms that do not exist elsewhere and present peculiarities which form a unique biodiversity mosaic.

Monk Seal and the Common Dolphins are the most important and remarkable mammals in the coastline and the surrounding marine area.

More than 150 bird species regularly use Chalki, Nisyros, Symi and Tilos as a migration stop over site, a huge number in relation to the islands size, and it is considered an important element of its natural environment.

The particular importance of Tilos island for birds is documented because it has an important - in European or national level - population of certain species species, such as the Bonelli's Eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus) (5-6 pairs), the long â&#x20AC;&#x201C;legged buzzard (Buteo rufinus (6-8 pairs), the Eleonora's Falcon (Falco eleonorae) (> 500 pairs) and the Mediterranean Shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii) (25-30 pairs). The European Roller (Coracias garrulus), has a breeding population of 10-30 pairs, the best population in the Aegean region.

Numerous reptile species live in the islands in arid and dry areas and near rocks or stones. Among them the most important are the lizards Cyrtopodion kotschyi, Laudakia stellio, Hemidactylus turcicus, Ophisops elegans, Ablepharus kitaibelii and the snake Montivipera xanthina.

Sixteen diurnal species of lepidoptera insects are found on Tilos island.

Coastasl wetlands and sand dunes The small wetland (0,2 acres) of Livadia on the island of Tilos is of a great importance, but it is constantly shrinking due to human intervention and tourism infrastructure pressures. Habitat code 3170.

Protection and conservation of the wetland can be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness.

Relatively extensive sand dunes structures in Eristos and Skafi, are a common habitat in Greece.

Shrinking due to human activities associated with tourism development on sandy beaches. Protection and conservation is necessary, not only because of the wetland and sand dunesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; biodiversity but also because of their importance as natural mechanisms of flood control against sea level rise.

The marine world around the islands is very rich. The visitors to the sea-bed will encounter numerous Sandsmelts (Atherinomorus lacunosus), 2 species of Squaretail rabbitfish (Siganus luridus and Siganus rivulatus), Reticulated leatherjackets (Stephanolepis diaspros), 3 species of Mullets (Sargocentron hastatus, Dussumieria acuta and Leiognathus lunzingeri) and the Fish hedgehog (Lagocephalus spadiceus). Tuna also is present (Thunnus alalunga, Thunnus thunnus) and Bonitos (Katsuwonus pelamis), which face overfishing problems. The presence of the rare Moonfish (Mola mola) is also important in Tilos waters.

Benthic life Large sedimentary deep coasts are mostly found in the south-eastern Aegean coasts Sea with a high quality coarse sand communities, the most protected ones,. A typical community characteristic of these 52

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

high energy environments is that of the Amphioxus sand community comprising of the hemichordate Branchiostomma lanceolatum which is considered a key biodiversity element. These high energy environments usually are characterized by coarse sediments like fine or coarser sand and gravel and do not favour a very high diversity and species richness that may vary from 12 to 34 species per sampling unit of 0.1m2, an open bay also covered by marine angiosperms (Cymodocea, Halophila). A higher diversity and species richness is usually found in sublittoral combination sediments like that of the Biogenic Detritic sand communities (DC) characterized also as coralligenous sand or “tragana”, a community type belonging both to sedimentary as well as in rocky deep type. Thus a high species number that may reach 100 species per 0.2 m2 or 90 per 0.1m2 have been recorded in the South Aegean coasts. The rocky water body type is also very important for hosting the underwater cave habitats of the small South Aegean islands where the monk seal is present.

Invertebrate bottom fauna, macro-algae and angiosperms Polychaeta, Mollusca, Crustacea, Macroalgae, Seagrasses On soft substrates of the South Aegean the marine Angiosperms Posidonia oceanica and Cymodocea nodosa are widespread, whereas the angiosperms Zostera noltii and Halophila stipulacea are restricted to specific areas.

The fish fauna of the studied area Siganus rivulatus, Siganus turidus, Sargecentron rubrum, Stephanolopis diaspros, Pempheris vanicolensis (alien species entered in the Mediterranean basin) Siganus rivulatus and Sargecentron rubrum.

The most abundant fish families are: Sparidae (13 species), Lambridae (10 species), Centracanthidae (5 species), Serranidae (6 species) and Scorpaenidae (4 species). The most abundant species during the samples were: Siganus turidus, Sparisoma cretense, Boops boops, Spicara maena, Phycis phycis, Serranus cabrilla, Pagellus acarne and Mullus surmuletus. Lepidotrigla cavillone, Serranus hepatus,Spicara smaris. In deeper waters (150-500 m) the most abundant species, were: Argentina sphyraena, Chlorophthalmus agassizi, Gadiculus argenteus, Merluccius merluccius. Some alien species found in Symi island: Parexocoetus mento, Sargecentron rubrum, Apogon nigripinnis, Upeneus moluccensis, Pempheris vanicolensis, Siganus rivulatus, Siganus luridus, Stephanolepis diaspros, Hemiramphus far, Leiognathus klunzinger. The study area was classified as part of the biogeographic “Lessepsian Province” of the Mediterranean Sea Threats The Islands ecosystems have been managed in a sustainable way for centuries which contributed to the preservation of the high levels of the islands biodiversity related to an extensive and low input model (combining low intensity farming with extensive livestock keeping) and other small scale activities such as bee keeping, fishing or small scale tourism. This combination supported a subsistence economy, with of small agricultural lots producing either fodder crops or local crop varieties for local consumption.

This model persisted for centuries, resulting in well preserved mountain ecosystems with scrublands and pasturelands of high quality, under low grazing pressure, capable of supporting a wide range of biodiversity, including local endemic plants, passerine birds and birds of prey. The wetland ecosystems of the islands, being also part of the extensive pastoralism model, were also preserved in good quality, providing valuable habitat for migratory water birds, as well as for local biodiversity such as bats, terrapins and passerines. Thirty years ago, this model started collapsing. Changes disrupted the rotational and nomadic pasturalism model. As a result, animals are kept on the mountain or in secluded

53

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

pasturelands in the rest of the island, year round, overgrazing the habitat and resulting in the degradation of shrub lands and forestlands all over the island.

The EU subsidies of the last 30 years have resulted in increased numbers of animals on site and thus to a larger overgrazing problem. At the same time, the invasion of mass tourism had as a consequence the total abandonment of marginal agricultural cultivations in terraces, which had already stopped supporting he nomadic pasturalists and thus were of no value for the farmers. These cultivations used to provide valuable foraging habitats for resident and migratory birds. Tourism had another negative impact: due to the expansion of housing at the coastal area, it destroyed or degraded the remaining island wetlands. Tourism also brings visitors to remote and uninhabited islets and rocky coastline, where important colonies of seabirds, the Eleonora’s falcon, and populations of rare chasmophytic plants are found.

Moreover, these Islands, which are Natura 2000 sites, faced a radical decrese of the fishing product, due to the augmentation of sea mammal mumbers (dolphins and monk seals) and of the lagocephalus fish, which deplete the fishermen’ catches and destroy their fishing gear, consequently increasing their expenses and diminishing their gains also causing serious problems to fishe’s diversity.

Previous conservation efforts in the project area and/or for the habitats/species targeted by the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) The proposed project is based on the experience gained by the efforts of the four Municipalities (especially that of Tilos) and those of different stakeholders to preserve the high quality of local ecosystems and the valuable nature and biodiversity of the four islands.

The various actions implemented since then, contributed in reducing the loss of local biodiversity, especially of rare and threatened bird species. As a result today we have much better knowledge of the islands biodiversity as well as knowledge around issues regarding the conservation of the islands ecosystems. Another important result of the previous conservation efforts is the fact that the local society and stakeholders are aware of the importance of local natural environment and of its potential contribution to the development of a sustainable local economy, which will integrate, protect and promote the value biodiversity conservation.

More particularly: o Conservation efforts started in the early 1990s, when the banning of hunting was decided in 1993, by Tilos Municipality, which is still in effect and has resulted in very good chukar and pigeon populations on the island, supported threatened raptors such as the Bonelli’s eagle and the long – legged buzzard. However, these good practices have not been adopted by the Municipalities of Chalki, Nisyros and Symi. o The participation of the Municipality of Tilos in a number of island conservation initiatives and networks, was a strategic decision taken to promote a more sustainable use of the local environment for the benefit of local society, landscape and biodiversity. The present proposal has been developed aiming to further local collaboration, the sharing of experience between the four Municipalities, and most importantly the involvement of local authorities in promoting sustainable practices, policies and actions based on an integrated strategic plan for the protection and promotion of biodiversity.

54

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

o Eight years ago a Special Environmental Study for Tilos Island, the most time and effort consuming part of the procedure that leads to legal protection of the island’s natural environment, has been completed and officially adopted. This offered the basic prerequisite for the SPA site legal protection, while identifying the environmentally sensitive zones of the island. o A number of conservation actions have already been implemented in Tilos and the surrounding islets, within the context of wider HOS conservation projects, such as the Life projects for the conservation of the Auduin’s Gull, the Mediterranean Shag and the Eleonora Falcon. But most importantly, the ornithological value of the island has been identified and acknowledged due to the HOS IBA programme, already since the early 1990s.

Previous conservation action results have influenced the islands of Nisyros and Symi, where the Municipalities have initiated similar efforts. Thus, their participation in the proposed project comes with great resolve and determination.

Major milestone for the conservation of Tilos biodiversity was the planning and implementation of LIFE04 NAT/GR/000101 project entitled “TILOS - Conservation management of an Island SPA -” implemented by the Municipality in the period 2004-2008.

The project’s objective was to implement management measures in order to improve the conservation status of the Hieraaetus fasciatus, Falco eleonorae and Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii and to set a basis for the SPA management requirements of the site of Tilos.

The project was successfully implemented and had a number of important achievements, including: a. the establishment of a local NGO (Tilos Park) devoted to the preservation of local nature, b. the planning of specific management measures for the three species, c. the creation of a local info center and d. the implementation of a very wide public awareness campaign for the 3 species conservation.

The project produced an After LIFE Conservation plan, which identified the main objectives of future actions for the conservation of the local biodiversity. These objectives are elaborated in the present proposal.

In addition, the Hellenic Environment Ministry is in the process of establishing the Tilos Natural Park with protection zones on the entire island after the TPA successfully lobbied the Ministry to issue its October 2006 approval of the Park establishment recommended by scientists in 1997. As a result, since the entire island has European and official Hellenic recognition as a protected site, the European and Member State nature protection designations provide the justification as well as the European governmental and NGO funding opportunities to implement nature protection actions throughout Tilos.

The entire island is a Natura 2000 site.

Stakeholders targeted as part of management action - success stories: The Municipality commissioned an environmental study eleven years ago to determine the existing wildlife and make recommendations. Nothing further was done with the study. The TPA Founder/Director saw the study collecting dust at City Hall, asked what was being done, the Mayor replied “Nothing” and the TPA Founder/Director asked permission to conduct efforts to advance the implementation of the study recommendations i.e. establish the Natural Park. The Mayor agreed and added that there would be no payment of funds for any such effort.

55

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

The TPA Founder then established the TPA and began philanthropic work in furtherance of the Park establishment and nature protection activities. From July 26, 2004, the NGO establishment date, through April 2007, the TPA was managed by 2 unpaid volunteers (the TPA Founder and Co-Founder) despite several face to face threats of death and physical violence by a small minority of residents against the TPA Founder during the first 2,5 years.

Despite the foregoing, each of the management objectives was gradually implemented by the Founder and Co-Founder with part time unpaid assistance from 2 stakeholder volunteers (one of whom is a family member of a former nature protection opponent). At the end of the first 3 years, EUROPARC Federation provided valuable support for a fourth year, 2008, internship program on the island. During the fourth year, Euronatur committed to assist the island in methods to be determined and finalized in 2007/2008.

Stakeholder Island clean-up volunteers Stakeholder volunteers direct and participate in island and coastal clean-up actions that consist of removing island trash, including the trash that washes up from the Aegean from passing boat traffic.

Stakeholders supervise and participate with the island elementary and high school students during the clean-up operations and explain the environmental reasons for the action as well as the resulting benefits to wildlife during these excursions. The stakeholders use specific endangered Tilos island terrestrial and marine wildlife species, such as Caretta caretta (Loggerhead sea turtle), Monachus monachus (Mediterranean Monk Seal), Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii (Mediterranean Shag), and Falco eleonorae (Eleonora falcon) as examples of how specific types of trash will reduce the population of the foregoing through plastic bag and bottle abandonment, washed up bottles of liquid tar, syringes, etc. The impact of the biodiversity loss on the residents and visitors is then explained to the students in a way that they can understand, such as a loss of sea turtles through asphyxiation (when the species mistakes plastic bags for their jellyfish food) results in increased jellyfish stinging while swimming due to reduced jellyfish predators such as the sea turtle.

Stakeholder nature protection volunteers The TPA established a stakeholder volunteer operated Avian Recovery Center (ARC) with indoor and outdoor landscaped cages (approximately 3x5 meters each) to provide shelter and care for primarily avian species rescued by island stakeholders and brought to the ARC. The ARC receives medical advice in each case from the University of Thessaloniki Veterinary School of Medicine because there is no veterinarian on the island. Resident unpaid volunteers assist in bringing required medicine and food (such as fresh fish for the herons, and recommended food for the other species) and the volunteers are instrumental in the process of hand feeding which is usually required for most of the injured species or species weakened by migration. The volunteers donate their personal resources for the food and medicine. In the first 2 years of operation, the ARC treated 27 birds, 18 feral cats and 5 Eastern European hedgehogs representing 16 avian and 2 mammal species. The foregoing has been documented in the Tilos Park Journal accessible through the Tilos Park website â&#x20AC;&#x201C; www.tilos-park.org.

Stakeholder ornithological monitoring assistance volunteers Stakeholders were inspired by the activities generated by the EU Tilos LIFE Nature program for the birds. As a result, stakeholders volunteer to serve as island guides to the ornithologists who visit Tilos for bird monitoring in the LIFE program, the related Hellenic Ornithological Society Eleonora falcon monitoring project and the bi-annual Tilos Bird Ringing Research Project organized by the TPA. The volunteer stakeholders participate in the Bird Ringing Research Project with an average of 12-14 birds ringed by each volunteer stakeholder participant under the direction of the ornithologists. These nature

56

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

protection actions have increased the stakeholders’ awareness of their indigenous island species, the species’ breeding/feeding habits and the island habitats required to be preserved for their continued survival.

Best practice character of the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) The project has an innovative best practices character due to: 

integrated biodiversity strategy based on thematic Action Plans to demonstrate that biodiversity policies could be linked with other sectoral policies contributing to ensuring an economically viable and socially accepted local development, which could reconcile land use and development needs with the conservation of biodiversity and maintenance of ecosystem services;



demonstration projects, which will be implemented in each island in view to influence even broader all the small islands of South Aegean Region Islands;



the model of creating viable small scale economic activities associated with the island biodiversity conservation, and capable of supporting the long term conservation of the islands natural assets is an innovative approach and if successful, it could provide the basis for the sustainable management of a large number of islands within EU;



actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation), where the practices involved concern the improvement of land management practices in order to produce high quality agricultural and livestock products, while protecting and enhancing – restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources;



actions, which focus on the transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources, promote education and local awareness through pilotdemonstration projects for the benefit of local economy and sustainable development;



integrated crop-livestock systems promotes a sustainable use and management of land and natural resources ensuring long term benefits in terms of soil quality and productivity, conservation agriculture activities minimising soil disturbance and keeping soil covered at all times, allows the soil to hold water far longer and facilitates deeper rooting of crops;



adaptation against drought as well as against excessive rainfall preventing floods though better water infiltration;



adoption of mixed systems as a cost and labor saving approach for small holder farmers, especially to the farmers’ households without sufficient power of labor, reducing the drudgery and work load in the field, thus saving time which could be dedicated to do other things, such as income diversification, off-farm employment, attending learning events or taking care of household chores and more time with family and children;



adequate and scientifically sound datasets of the type, size distribution and quality of foraging sites, with special reference to Posidonia beds and datasets of the distribution and abundance of target species;



detailed maps, habitat assessment protocols and datasheets, Management Guidelines for Fisheries and an operational plan for the improvement of target seabird foraging grounds and will be communicated among stakeholders and central administration (Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Rural Development and Food), regional and local authorities; 57

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4



knowing all the fishery activities, including also the problems faced by professionals in each area, would then lead to the adoption of a more appropriate fisheries’ management policy.



register, mapping and study coastal and marine environment to propose a network of Marine Protected Areas non-fishing shaping economic and social opportunities which would otherwise be impossible to be implemented, with the aid of man-made actions which can only be applied to areas that display limited fishing activity, such as ecotourism, fishing tourism, diving, underwater photography, scientific research and advanced maritime education;



evaluated data obtained from the project, based on the CBD Decision 9/20, which could be used for an assessment of future management structures based on the ecosystem service approach;



research in beach processes and morphodynamic modeling providing a monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc.



the creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches, also permitting (after systematic training) a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox;



development/evaluation of a database of the spatial and geo-environmental characteristics of the four island beaches (Nisiros, Tilos, Simi, Chalki), using widely-available, web-based information, which could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g. Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive));



the provision of a prognostic coastal management tool, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools (long- and short-term sea level rise scenarios and differential hydrodynamic, morphological, and sedimentological beach characteristics);



study of the dynamics of the sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins on the basis of hydrological modeling and field observations with particular emphasis on extreme events to assist the development of improved scientific approaches to monitor/model sediment loads and yields and assess water/sediment discharges of the small island drainage basins (very useful in the implementation of relevant EC legislation (e.g. Directive 2000/60/EC-Water Framework Direct);



assist in enhancing the sustainable development prospects of coastal communities and ecosystems such as small wetlands and sand dunes in the longer term;



sustainable tourism or ecotourism process generated economic benefits for host communities, organizations and authorities managing natural areas with conservation purposes and providing alternative employment and income opportunities for local communities;



sharing various types of benefits, arising from «Tourism Product Development via Biodiversity Sustainability», integrating biodiversity, rural, coastal and marine concerns, together with indigenous and local communities, produced an important added value not only for biodiversity protection but also for new job creation, fostering local enterprises, participation in tourism enterprises and projects, education, direct investment opportunities, economic linkages and ecological services,



Memorandum of Understanding with all relevant organizations and stakeholders building

58

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

cooperation between private and public organizations to facilitate the development of the project proposals and joint initiatives aimed at reinforcing the role of biodiversity and natural ecosystems for sustainable tourism development; 

elaboration of a Strategic Plan for South Aegean Small Islands Biodiversity protection aiming at the overgrazing and overfishing control, the development of marine protected areas and the development of a more sustainable tourism, in parallel with primary activities development in a sustainable manner as well as elaboration of thematic sustainable land, coastal and marine environment planning focused on biodiversity protection to further reduce habitat fragmentation together with a Road Map of Actions and a list of means of implementation ensuring agreements on «Quality Pacts» and thematic «Covenant based on Environmental Governance;



consultation procedures and workshops with professional, social institutions, NGOS, Universities and Municipalities increasing the awareness of the local community for biodiversity conservation and providing solutions thought Partnership Volunteers Agreements on Local Biodiversity and Quality Pact and Covenant.



the production of a biodiversity monitoring network and report providing data on threats/impacts from human interactions or changing environmental conditions, developing relevant indicators, to assess progress made establishing a volunteer network and guide management actions;



a local and regional training approach to integrated biodiversity conservation based on effective technical instruments to engage major stakeholders and to convey the appropriate messages to mainstream biodiversity;



training local staff, employees of local administrations and other stakeholders involved increasing their competitiveness on an increasingly chances for labor mobility and new green skills, green labor market and increasing understanding of importance of biodiversity and opportunities it offers for local sustainable development



capacity-building for communication, education and public awareness providing resources and increasing skills to apply the more integrated approach to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use in their everyday work



establishment and management of a global communication, education and public awareness network composed of new information technologies and traditional communication mechanisms stimulating local, regional and sub regional communication, education and public awareness networks;



creating synergy between existing networks relevant to communication, education and public awareness by an electronic portal and an alternative information dissemination mechanism;



a registry of education and communications experts, organizations and networks on the conservation status of natural valuable ecosystems and habitats, mostly the priority ones and including flora and fauna species, combating invasive alien species;



development of an effective innovative eco-friendly and sustainable strategy for the protection of environment and health from risks and impacts posed by exposure to herbicides reducing also the negative impact and the risk of diffusion of the most threatening invasive alien species;

59

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

Demonstration character of the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) The project has a strong demonstration character due to the following: o

actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation) and land management practices involved shall produce high quality agricultural and livestock products, while protecting and enhancing – restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources;

o

actions focused on the transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources, shall promote education and local awareness demonstrating the benefit of local economy and sustainable development;

o

practical implementations of agri- and pastoral environmental management plans shall demonstrate the benefits (environmental and economic) to local societies and therefore will make these societies more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future;

o

actions related with sustainable management of grazing lands and cultivated areas, with reduced inputs and plants suited for the pedo climatic conditions of the area contributing to demonstrate that conservation and economic activities related with land management – agriculture are not only possible but they can also be profitable, which can be a far reaching future impact for the area.

o

re- introduction of farming abandoned land with local species or with species that are very well adapted to local soil and climate conditions with positive impacts on biodiversity, nutrient recycling and long term soil fertility;

o

experiment on different types of financial mechanisms, such as (a) leasing at a low monthly cost, allowing farmers to invest their capital in equipment and supplies rather than in land payments, thus making the farm more productive; (b) «Contract Farming Programmes», made

by Banks or other organisations to support Agriculture, for a short or long period for a direct payment of the productions to insure the volunteers farmers.

o

review the economic characteristics of the ‘biodiversity policy design problem’, before moving to consider a range of policy options, and a series of policy design challenges, defining a classification system by which most policy options for biodiversity conservation on private land can be described in terms of their most important features from an economics viewpoint;

o

provide financial security in order to ensure that the farmland they preserve remains actively farmed by local resident farmers.

o

evaluation of the results of the agricultural and pastoral environmental management plan on biodiversity conservation

Pilot aspects of the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) A much better understanding of the risks and vulnerability associated with climate-change driven erosion is required for the development of appropriate adaptation measures, which enhance the longterm sustainability of beaches and their multiple ecologic and socio-economic uses.

To this end, provisions are taken under action A1, C1 to develop coastal hazard data bases (e.g.

Vafeidis et al., 2008), as well as methodologies/tools to assess the vulnerability of coastal systems to sea level rise/extreme events (e.g. Hinkel and Klein, 2009).

60

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

However, these tools face several limitations in respect of their coastal retreat/inundation forecasts (due to e.g. lack of coastal Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) with appropriate accuracy resolution and of other necessary input parameters such as coastal hydrodynamic information.

Along this action, not only scientific questions is aimed to be answered through extensive field work and data analysis / modeling, but it is also of interest to a diverse range of users, since the land or seaderived flood hazards can affect local productive structures, tourism, environmental and economic sector.

The proposed action will promote a holistic approach that is necessary in the assessment of coastal risks and is also a necessary requirement of the Integrated Coastal Zone Management and Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive). Besides, the overall objective of the research and innovation work also meets the objectives of the European Directive on “Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community” (INSPIRE) and contributes to the Digital Agenda for Europe.

Furthermore, local young people will become familiar with data collection and analysis methods (meteorological station) and also become responsible and sensitive to the impacts of climate change through self-observation changes and measurements in the coastal zones of the islands.

Finally, a thorough assessment of preserving valuable coastal ecosystems such as wetlands and sand dunes in order to combat the climate change impacts will be made.

EU added value of the project and its actions: (Maximum Characters: 10000) The project makes a significant contribution to the European Community efforts, responding directly in many EU strategies and policies, especially concerning biodiversity.

As many of the species targeted by the project are priority species for the EU, and are included in Annex I of the Directive 79/409/EEC or in the Annex II of the Directive 92/43/EEC, the project targets expected improvement of their conservation status, which is directly related to the objectives of these Directives and could contribute to: i.

protect and conserve natural coastal ecosystems (wetlands and sand dunes) along with their value as amenity and public awareness resources as well as their potential to mitigate sealevel rise due to climatic changes;

ii.

minimize particular threats to biodiversity increasing impact of climate change;

iii.

support biodiversity adaptation to climate change, while ensuring that climate change adaptation and mitigation measures are not themselves harmful to biodiversity;

iv.

responding to pressures on natural resources and global processes and uncertainty through technological innovation and data harmonisation.

v.

creating a significant societal impact by advancing the use (i) of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches also permitting a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox, and

vi.

of geographical information for natural risk prevention and reduction.

The proposed project actions address also the EU’s long-term public policy objectives: -

underlying that “It is consequently increasingly recognized that one of the most effective ways

61

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

to protect and sustainably manage and use biodiversity for sustainable livelihoods is through genuine and durable partnerships for action”.

-

developing a Regional and Local Biodiversity Strategy based on a wide–ranging expertise and public consultation supporting EU efforts to launch a debate on a longer–term vision concerning new measures and actions on the frame of future policy. This is a big challenge to demonstrate the significance of the integrated ecosystem-based approach to climate change adaptation, to support policies and policy instrument and to sustain a Local Green Economy.

-

safeguarding and continually improving the conservation status of species/habitats of European Community interest, of important wetlands, of most high–nature–value farmland and of marine ecosystems, e. gain knowledge for future application and the benefits resulting from the proposed actions, contributing to the EU aim of halting biodiversity loss;

-

assist local authorities providing detailed guidance on implementation of the proposed actions, strategies and sectoral action plans by building partnerships and synergies enhancing cooperation on the base of the understanding of the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services;

-

provide scientific documentation and data for marine biodiversity, recording, mapping and assessing important species and designate Marine protected areas;

-

deliver scientific data and monitoring tools to assess the impact of biodiversity conservation measures resulting also structural social and economic changes;

-

contribute to the establishment of alternative, sustainable, practices for agriculture, livestock’s, fisheries and tourism as best practices to be followed by other small islands of South Aegean Region with similar characteristics.

-

apply alternative productive practices and forms of tourism;

Summarized it is evident that this project contributes to: i.

achieve the EU Biodiversity 2010 target of halting the loss of biodiversity as restoration of biodiversity together with sustainable rural, forest, rural, coastal and marine management practices have a huge potential to biodiversity loss halting;

ii.

assist the implementation of the National Strategy for Biodiversity objectives achieving the objectives related to biodiversity conservation and restoration in island ecosystems, the preservation of endemic plants and animals, the restoration of wetlands and the conservation of small uninhabited islets as also the better understanding of the sustainable development challenges;

iii.

contribute to reduce negative impacts of point–source pollutants, diffuse pollutants, reducing urban and tourism pressures, increasing unsustainable use of agriculture, promoting Good Farming Practice and organic farming supporting farmland biodiversity, but also supporting sustainable forest, coastal and marine management and finally reducing fishing pressure, to improve the status of harvested stocks and better protect non–target species and habitats;

iv. contribute to strengthen the EU resilience in adaptation on Climate Change providing important results responding to many serious environmental problems related to climate change, altering climatic conditions and minimize impacts on biodiversity; v.

provide a wider terrestrial, freshwater and marine environment policy in line with the reformed CAP and CFP measures to ensure the high–nature–value farmland, woodland and forest and 62

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

support their restoration, together with measures to restore fish stocks resulting multiples benefits to biodiversity and to climate change efforts; vi. contribute to arise awareness and civil society involvement, delivering important volunteerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s agreements, contributing to a significant reduction of the pressures on biodiversity, supporting local, regional and territorial sustainable development as a key to preventing, minimising and offsetting negative impacts thereby reinforcing the compatibility with biodiversity.

Socio-economic and ecosystem services effects of the project: (Maximum Characters: 10000) The project shall contribute to influence socio-economic and ecosystem services effects providing also practical implementation to local societies of the benefits (environmental and economic) and therefore will make them more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future; it makes also certain that the desired conservation goals will be achieved by reaching economic results as well, demonstrating to the participants and to local societies that indeed this is not only possible but it can also be profitable, which can be a far reaching future impact for the area.

This project, focusing at safeguarding local nature, rural and coastal biodiversity, should also deliver a comprehensive strategic action plan for a sustainable marine environment management of the islands, encouraging the designation of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;fishing free areaâ&#x20AC;?, as also an ecotourism action plan and biodiversity oriented tourism activities, to enhance local economy, integrating available information on the spatial distribution of rural, coastal and marine biodiversity and threats, increasing awareness among key stakeholders and the general public and promoting their active participation. Eco-services and business, involving a strategic approach, could also promote local products and business involving the business sector of the island.

In addition to on-farm management through organic and habitat enhancement practices, the success of biodiversity conservation in protected areas will depend upon how well individual farms are integrated into the wider landscape. Through proper planning at a landscape level, natural and managed areas may be suitably integrated into the landscape in order to reconcile human activities with the goals of biodiversity conservation. In order to best integrate the multiplicity of objectives within protected areas, land managers need effective planning tools to properly manage multi-use areas for the benefit of all interests.

The proposed actions address also socioeconomic and ecosystem services from which very important results are expected, such as: a.

positive impacts on the profitability of farms,

b.

making farming more attractive and helping in retaining the younger population of the islands by providing another livelihood option;

c.

cooperation between farmers and farmers and other local actors by providing practical ways of improving land management practices and avoiding existing local conflict on the use of land, especially in relation with grazing;

d.

provide regulation and mitigation services through the higher expected degrees of annual plants diversity, which will increase soil cover and decrease evapo transpiration and erodibility, preserving thus soil and water resources;

e.

reduce the overall carbon footprint of the islands by reducing the dependency from imported feed, 63

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

f.

the transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources, promoting thus education and local awareness through pilot-demonstration projects that will show through practical implementation the benefits (environmental and economic) of conservation to local societies and therefore will make these societies more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future.

g.

collaboration with the private sector

h.

integrated crop-livestock systems as an opportunity to collaborate with private sector, especially with livestock-related business activities

i.

production input supply and training,

j.

facilitating access to finance, equipment and machinery.

k.

direct and indirect benefits of the holistic management refer also to the following areas should be: - Soil fertility: more biologically active soils, more productive rangeland or cropland and controlled livestock carrying capacity; - Environment: control of desertification, enhanced soil carbon sequestration and related reduction of the existing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, use of cleaner water, protection from drought; - Economic benefits: reduced costs for inputs/technology acquisition, increased savings and increased food security (particularly due to the crop and livestock production); - Biodiversity: restoration of natural wildlife habitat, improved economic viability for organic production.

The project is intended to work as a catalyst in launching the radical structural changes in development issues affecting directly society and economy, to implement sectoral policies and outdated attitudes.

Providing, inter alia, a roadmap for effective and efficient management of resources, spreading solutions, best practices demonstration projects and dissemination in the fields of agriculture, livestock, fisheries and tourism sustainable management, the project shall support the community policies halting biodiversity loss, while creating investment opportunities and modern social structures based on solidarity and partnership, mobilizing human resources.

Responding to EU relative environmental objectives this project shall also contribute to inform, educate and mobilize small islands societies to make continuous efforts following sustainable practices and good governance procedures in order to keep its population and especially young people offering those jobs and a sustainable future.

Efforts for reducing the project's "Carbon footprint": (Maximum Characters: 10000) For the actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation), the carbon footprint of the actions is expected to be relatively limited, as they plants that will be used for grazing land improvement and for cultivation of cereals â&#x20AC;&#x201C; legumes will be local and adapted to Mediterranean climates.

However, livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions impacts is important and this project takes care to avoid risks; Thus is possible by implementing a proper exercise of sustainable farming, whereby the production and consumption of livestock adapted and limited so as to maintain ecological limits.

The animals will be reared only on marginal soils unsuitable for other purposes, and fed only with 64

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

genuine products such as plant residues. This approach has real benefits in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

On the other hand, the project action contribute to increase soil cover and decrease evapotranspiration and erodibility, preserving soil and water resources and lower dependency from imported feed; Thus, will reduce the carbon footprint of the islands in general by reducing the need to transport this feed.

Studying and developing a wide range of adaptive measures between existing technological options in the farm and improved farm management practices and policy tools (eg adjustment plans) it should be possible to meet the anticipated changes in weather conditions; farmers could change the rotation of crops to exploit in the best way the water available to adjust sowing dates according to the temperature and rainfall, using crop varieties that suit the new climatic conditions (eg more resistant to heat and drought), or to plant in farmland hedgerows and small woodlands reduce the escape of water and act as deflectors.

Anyway, the better inform farmers about climate risks and feasible solutions adaptation is also important.

The prevention of the effects due to extreme weather conditions and events, that are considered as the most imminent danger (such as flooding), by providing predictions of ranges of beach retreats for different long- and short-term sea level rise scenarios and differential hydrodynamic, morphological, and sedimentological beach characteristics, could be a useful tool to decrease the project eventual "carbon foot print". This will be done on the basis of the application of suitable ensembles of existing parametric and numerical morphodynamic models, which will provide a prognostic coastal management tool, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools.

Stakeholders involved and target audience of the project: (Maximum Characters: 12000) The involvement of stakeholders is a key part of the project. From the earlier stage it is crucial to identify stakeholders and project target groups. This is vital for specifying goals as well as for communication with partners, the public, and everyone affected by the project as well as to set up the internal process and to build relationships with communities intermediaries to identify the broadest pool of stakeholders.

A project task is to consider and balance their various interests in the project.

Involving Stakeholders Identify the key players and the main stakeholders to fill specific positions within the project are a preliminary duty, as well as the designation in advance some of the potential positions that these key players have to fill. At the beginning, they are external to the project and to this reason the basic aim is to pique their interest in the topic at hand and get them involved. It is also important to make stakeholders allies of the project setting up the project as a partnership with the key stakeholders. This is possible to do in a variety of ways, from keeping the stakeholders involved in every step of the process as a partner to simply ensuring that they are kept informed and given the opportunity to comment. Some stakeholder groups (public agencies, nonprofits, business, universities) may play multiple roles.

65

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

Stakeholders may be involved through: ·

Steering or advisory committees - groups that guide the work of the initiative, usually comprised of working group chairs.

·

Working groups - groups with responsibility for specific aspects of the work, e.g. assessing community needs and priorities.

·

Surveys – provide an opportunity to reach very large segments of the community, while requiring limited commitment.

·

Newsletters – provide a mechanism for keeping constituents informed; they should include a feedback mechanism.

·

Personal meetings – may be used by project managers to engage opinion leaders or by intermediary community groups to engage citizens at the community level.

Target Audience of Stakeholders The target audience of stakeholders will include but is not limited to several categories of interested groups and individuals, both of the municipalities involved and the broader island area. For those groups identified as having significant interests or deriving important benefits, it is important to look at their priorities and motivations, decision-making processes and institutions, and understand the social, economic and cultural links between each group and the resource.

For the purposes of the management and decision-making, it is important to identify "primary" and "secondary" stakeholders. Primary stakeholders can be defined as those with a direct interest in the resource; either because they depend on it for their livelihoods or they are directly involved in its exploitation in some way. Secondary stakeholders would be those with a more indirect interest, such as those involved in institutions or agencies concerned with managing the resource or those who depend at least partially on wealth or business generated by the resource.

The concept of the stakeholder does not extend merely to those directly involved in the exploitation of a resource but extends to all those deriving some form of benefit from the resource or the area in which it is found.

Project Target Audience Leading Businesses: Development Corporation of Local Authorities of Cyclades, Development Agency of Dodecanese, Association for the Development and Progress of the Dodecanese, Union of Agriculture Association, Fisheries Union, Woman’s Cooperative of Kos and Tilos, Technical Chamber of Greece, Department of Dodecanese, Center of Entrepreneurial and Technological Development of South Aegean, Chamber of Cyclades and Dodecanese, Hoteliers Association of Rhodes, Kos, Primary stakeholders: Particular social groups will be also involved and participated to the project, in every stage during and after the project duration, chosen in relation with the concrete objectives issued by the proposed actions.

In the case of marine resources: The stakeholders involved in the frame of Marine environment and fisheries action are: a. the local fishermen (professional and recreational), historical involvement in the fishery tenure

66

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

over a particular fishing ground (area licensing) b. the competent local and regional authorities related to the management of fisheries resources or individuals engaged in the trade of fishery c. the professional fishermen, which will provide their data concerning their landings, their effort and will collaborate to supply of biological samples in order to study the biology, ecology and population dynamics of fishery resources in the study area d. all those involved in the processing and sale of fish, fish consumers, tourists in the area, transport operators and their passengers, industries using water or polluting it, people involved in forestry in mangrove areas, and any number of other groups or individuals with more marginal interests.

In the case of farming and livestock: For the actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation), two main groups of stakeholders will the involved: a. Stockbreeders and farmers that will participate in the pilot actions and demonstrate the improvement of land management practices and of the profitability of their farms; b. Other social groups of the local societies that will see the expected positive effects of the action through practical implementation and realize the benefits (environmental and economic) of conservation to local societies and therefore will make them more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future, a far reaching future impact for the area.

Both these groups form the main target of the specific actions which are: Livestock and meat trade associations; Livestock farmers' associations; Governmental animal health officials; Other public officials/agencies; General public In the case of tourism: Stakeholder groups of the tourism sector, such as Tour operators; Travel Agencies, Tourism market Process The project has an open mind perception for the involvement of different groups, the relationships between them and their respective responsibilities, taking into consideration, as a general rule, that the more participatory approach is the better to achieve consensus on proposals about sustainable planning, use of market-based instruments (e.g. certification), innovative financing strategies etc. Thus, priority is already be given, about one year before finalizing the project, to identify all relevant stakeholders and social groups and have preliminary discussions with them as to understand better what their stake or interest in the process is, and how best they should be represented. As the project is oriented on â&#x20AC;&#x153;integrate biodiversity into corporate strategiesâ&#x20AC;?, is important to be addressed, from the start, to a large group of stakeholders, local authorities, companies, small and medium-sized businesses, agriculture and fishers associations, tourism agencies and tour operators, etc., to identify together how biodiversity can influence corporate strategies to go beyond impact control analysis.

Aiming at creating a local social alliance the project shall provide appropriate communication and participation networks on a number of decision-making levels enabling islandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s communities to be involved. Many of the major determinants which encourage (or discourage) people to engage in sustainable resources management will be addressed from the start: land ownership and resource tenure, collection and sharing of revenues, management restrictions, rules for investment etc.

Concerning entrepreneurship, the South Aegean Region lacks previous experience in cluster policies, 67

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B4

no cluster â&#x20AC;&#x153;cultureâ&#x20AC;? and there are no mature clusters operating in the region. The policy has been implemented in clusters that develop technologies related to tourism. It is recommended to replicate a competitive technology industrial cluster approach to facilitate the rapid spread of good practice.

To this end, in terms of business support, it will be necessary to create a one-stop-shop by merging existing structures to support investors/SME, tour operators, travel agencies, hotels services, etc., in discussing, designing and implementing new business plans with an export orientated focus. On the same time a participatory process shall be developed to support the creation of a business angel network and co-investment fund, in partnership with other regions to ensure consensus and a large enough deal flow.

All relevant stakeholders shall be involved to decide in strategy design and implementation for governance of research and innovation policies building on previous experience in collaborative EU innovation policies.

The decision making process and management structure shall be addressed to: (a)

the regional council composed by the Governor and elected council as top decision making body;

(b)

the municipal councils composed by the Mayors and elected municipal as top decision making body;

(c)

a Steering Committee composed of regional stakeholders from the business and academic communities and the public administration, to consolidate and introduce the project results to the municipals or regional councils, and (c) thematic working groups focusing on main sectors and demonstration projects under the coordination of the project manager and the scientific team.

The formation of working groups shall be placed at the center of concern and will be supported by thematic groups of connected to thematic objectives (species conservation, agriculture, organic food production fisheries, tourism, etc.).

Although, other different methods for ensuring participation will be developed and most involve facilitated consultation and training workshops or other kinds of meetings will be organised. It is important that at each step, clear individual responsibilities will be allocated for carrying the process forward.

Aiming at improving development cooperation in the field of sustainable natural resources management the project focuses on addressing political, legal/ regulatory and institutional issues and deals with a rapidly expanding scope of stakeholders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; from rural communities, to forest owners, the timber industry, environmental groups and fisheries professionals/public administrators.

The project results will be disseminated to a large community of public, fishermen, policy and decision makers, stakeholders and many more. Dissemination will take place during the project to get feedback and input from external experts and to inform about the progress of the project activities and in the end of the project to provide end users with innovative scientific results.

Because of the complexity of most biodiversity issues carried out by the project, innovative participatory approaches and procedures shall be developed, establishing protocols and special regimes as base of all conservation interventions, as the project is addressing to all groups of stakeholders, to make them actively involved. These shall include involvement of local people even in surveys and monitoring.

68

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

Expected constraints and risks related to the project implementation and mitigation strategy: (Maximum Characters: 12000)

Biodiversity offsets have the potential to compensate for biodiversity loss, but a number of technical, ecological, geographical and economic constraints mean that this is not possible or appropriate in all circumstances. There is always the need for a strong operational and regulatory framework to create demand, establish basic standards, and drive the process.

The project explores constraints and their expected influence on the whole process in order to identify how to overcome them. In parallel, it explores how roles and responsibilities should be defined, including robust mechanisms for monitoring, enforcement, compliance and safeguarding against potential risks and uncertainties to ensure that benefits will be sustained in the long term.

1. Weather conditions: The hard weather condition prevailing during winter â&#x20AC;&#x201C; early spring make the field work at coastal areas very difficult. Additionally, the field work at sea and the approach of small islets during that period has proved to be quite a difficult task. These facts could have implications for the time schedule of the fieldwork foreseen in C actions, especially for actions C2 and C3, due to weather conditions, causing difficulties in reaching and operating in the project sites. In such a case field work may need to be postponed to later date during the same year or the following year. Well-trained field teams will be used to minimise the risk of a potential accident and adequate equipment will be used to cope with adverse weather conditions.

In any case, project partners have allocated a contingency period in its schedule of actions to allow sufficient time during the four year project implementation period to carry out actions postponed due to weather conditions.

2. Permissions for the implementation of the concrete conservation actions.

Some of the concrete conservation actions will need permits from the competent authorities. This includes the rat eradication, and the plantations. These permits are granted by the Greek Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change, and Region of South Aegean, there already exists a close collaboration with the respective departments, as shown in the support letters included, where there is a clear description of this collaboration. Indeed, the Ministry has granted in the past similar permits to HOS, for working with invasive species in Greek SPA sites.

3. Social constraints 3.1. Opposition from local stakeholders The project approach is based on an open participatory process to make decisions, involving local communities and stakeholder from the start in order to achieve, in every operational step, social consensus and to become successful in terms of understanding and implementation.

Although, some of the proposed actions on land, coastal and marine management, could be raised conflict situations and difficult discussions between concerned stakeholders.

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

Proposing concerning sustainable practices implementation linked with demonstration projects and innovative financing mechanisms (new instruments and approaches) to finance biodiversity and ecosystem services is possible to raise also different controversy opinions and conflicts between stakeholders.

In these cases, to emerge negative positions, more consultation meetings have to be organised providing further information based on best practices.

For instance, a large proportion of the costs associated with environmentally beneficial management on farmland and woodland are associated with arable land. The project will highlight that it cannot be assumed that simply having sufficient budgetary resources available will lead to the environmental outcomes being achieved. Policy design and effective implementation are critical factors that will influence the cost of achieving the desired results. In many cases achieving changes in management practices also requires a change in attitude and approach to a farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s core business activities.

On the project context all these factors have been seriously taken into consideration and relevant preparatory work has been carried out in close collaboration with associated beneficiaries and particular with the four Municipalities, the Region services and specific stakeholders to inform and explain challenges issued from the project, as well as to persuade local society for the benefits of the proposed project.

Obviously, there is a wide acceptance and support of the proposal, for the moment, from various stakeholder groups, including livestock keepers, beekeepers, farmers and local NGOs. On the other hand, responding to the needs of the new EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 and in addition to the EU co-financing, there is still room to engage more actively the private sector (businesses and financial institutions, the utilities sector and municipalities) and to put forward proposals for bankable projects.

This project is a first attempt to provide a comprehensive overview on the total costs for biodiversity and ecosystem actions and makes a significant contribution to the understanding of opportunity costs within the context of biodiversity policies and actions established in local and regional level. The estimates produced demonstrate the broad scale of biodiversity costs but also the significance of opportunity costs within these, acknowledging the high variance between regions.

3.2. The social aspects of biodiversity conservation The project shall investigate the social aspects of biodiversity conservation, in particular the links between biodiversity and employment, and the value of biodiversity for vulnerable rural people using vulnerability-related indicators coupled with spatial mapping of biodiversity and ecosystem values for the EU to determine whether the poor and vulnerable rural communities are more strongly dependent on the provision of ecosystem services.

A number of global case studies, scenarios, models and other quantitative tools will be presented to highlight a range of issues experienced by the rural poor in developing nations dependent on ecosystem services, explore future trends in biodiversity loss and ecosystem change and their associated impacts on ecosystem services.

It is important for local communities to understand the real costs of the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services for their future in these isolated small islands. The most of the case studies have provided evidence that the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services results in socio70

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

economic costs, including financial losses. Regarding the underlying reasons behind the loss, unsustainable resource management, including overexploitation of aquatic resources and agricultural intensification, combined with sectorally-oriented development initiatives are the principle drivers.

These elements are the only ones to emerge a larger acceptance of the project objectives enforcing more social groups involving and participating.

Developing a strategic adaptive management making linkages between science and biodiversity management is the only way to create opportunities for social co-learning amongst resource managers and scientists 4. Biodiversity and Businesses: Risks related to biodiversity and ecosystem services Companies, which are often addressing their biodiversity and ecosystem services risks, could indentify measures taken under the project as barriers for taking actions. The project shall present case studies of sectors selected for their dependency and impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services (food production, retail, tourism, bio-tech), their special link to consumers (retail) and to the whole economy (the financial sector) in order to explain in time and show that, although businesses demonstrate concerns for sustainability, they are much less aware of biodiversity and ecosystem services as an isolated issue.

Large companies are most advanced in addressing these risks, while SMEs seem to lack resources, awareness, knowledge and influence (e.g. against sub-suppliers) to do so.

Sectors most dependent on biodiversity and ecosystem services (e.g. food production, tourism) appear to be the most advanced in addressing their risks; securing future supply seems their main driver to do so and there is a growing trend towards direct procurement, ensuring a better control of upstream suppliers.

For sectors closest to consumers (e.g. retail sector), the demand for labels/certified products and the promotion of corporate image are seen as the most important drivers.

5. Other administrative or organization Risks - Contingency Actions A partner is facing difficulties to organise scheduled workshops, conferences or training activities: Other partners will try to support the organisation of the event by providing the necessary resources An expected deliverable is not delivered by the responsible partner: Other partners will try to assist so that there are no delays to the work plan. The Project Coordination committee will deal with specific problems Dissemination of the results has not reached the desired level: New, more effective, dissemination means will be selected by the consortium based on the projectsâ&#x20AC;&#x; results A partner desires to leave the consortium: The leaving partner will be substituted by another partner from the same country or another one with similar characteristics A work package leader desires to leave his position: The position can be filled by another partner who has the necessary skills Stakeholder donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t accept the project: New, more effective information about the project and the

71

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

expected results will be developed Stakeholder donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t trust each other: The scientific project partners are independent and adopt a neutral position for a balanced discussion and participation There is less participation: New, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed Financial and technical sustainability, carrying on activities in the medium -long term: Develop a sustainable management model based on social dialogue (public administration, tourism industry and university) competitiveness and measurability of tourism phenomena - Better understanding of the use of indicators Complexity of relations between project partners (regional steering local authorities, universities , stakeholders) or Planning tourism development / Attitude towards sustainability.: New instrument of Communication and reporting shall be developed.

Which actions will have to be carried out or continued after the end of the project? (Maximum Characters: 5000)

This LIFE SMIsLE BIO project is addressed to a particular small islands area, which form an integral, homogenous and a high quality ecosystem located in the South Aegean Sea and aims at highlighting its valuable biodiversity while providing long term social and economic benefits for the local communities.

The project provides strategic thematic components through the implementation of concrete actions and demonstration projects, focusing on the enhancement of the ecosystem services as a key asset in ensuring the link between biodiversity conservation measures and entrepreneurship. It consists of complementary and intercrossing concrete actions, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, which will be implemented after the preparatory work, as assured by the actions A1, A2, A3 and A4, including training and education.

Monitoring, assessment and dissemination of the results shall follow.

Based on an integrated ecosystem approach and in view to ensure a long term sustainability of the project, the context of the actions, the methodology and the overall management are corresponding directly to the local society interest and needs, taking into account all the conditions which are necessary in order to ensure the widest possible public participation and the active involvement of the targets groups, on the basis of transparency, equity, access to information, participatory process, etc.

The project key issue is the linkage between environment, economy and society in a win-win situation where all the relevant social groups and stakeholders will be invited to discuss and decide together for their future based on more sustainable practices made on the value of the biodiversity and the ecosystem services. On this basis it affect and influence directly the inhabitants and other participants making them to move forward gor ensuring the continuity of the project, consolidating the decisions taken and putting them in their practice. The commitments made during the project process between public and private sector will be a driving force in ensuring social and political will.

This project concrete actions are also directly related with the After LIFE Plan actions (F5, F6, F7) in a way to support the consolidation of data and results over the project lifetime but also to provide solid planning documents guiding the future implementation and expansion of an integrated biodiversity and ecosystem approach. Therefore, the elaboration of a Regional Biodiversity Strategy (F5) and 72

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

Biodiversity Indictors (F7) shall be undertaken by TPA in close collaboration with the municipalities, region, local stakeholders and the project partners with the support of CISD and assisted by the Local Biodiversity Protection Group (LBPG) which will be established in order to continue the consultation and the participatory decision making process, assure the established partnerships and define new possible collaboration between local authorities, the market sector, environmental stakeholders, etc.

On the other hand, as the Project has a wider demonstration character it could further motivate all the actors to continue and expand the proposed practices after the lifetime period. This process will be also assured by the continuation of the monitoring and dissemination actions (D1, D2, E1-E5) and Sectoral Action Plans (F6) for agriculture-livestock, fisheries, tourism, Integrated Coastal Zones Management (ICZM), designation of new Marine protected areas; Guidelines, ets. (action F2), which will be carry on under the responsibility of the TPA, the CISD and the HSIN assisted by the University of the Aegean (UAegean) and the Hellenic Center for Marine Research (HCMR).

Another important element for ensuring continuation, valorization and long term sustainability of the project, after the end of the project, is the parallel continuation of the demonstrations projects on agripastoral, fisheries and tourism sustainable practices to monitor the status of biodiversity and ecosystems. The project due to its realistic character is addressed not only to the regional and local level but also to the national one. The fully integration of biological diversity and ecosystem services concerns into the relevant policies and the linkage made with the market are potentially dynamic elements The proposed After LIFE Plans not only support the further implementation of the project actions but also identify new priority sectors, where more actions are needed assisting therefore the local authorities to play a leader planning role integrating policies into local plans as key components for future developments.

Finally, essential contribution will be the information and data provided concerning nature, biodiversity, grazing land, agriculture, fishery and tourism issues, coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems and coastal and marine sustainable management, building upon the islands natural and cultural resources mainstreaming biodiversity across sectors of government, society and economy.

How will this be achieved? What resources will be necessary to carry out these actions?

(Maximum Characters: 5000)

It is considered that the active involvement of local stakeholders in every stage of the Project implementation could be a driving force in order to ensure the continuation of the Projects objectives and results after LIFE, adopting the demonstration practices in their day to day management.

Furthermore, during and after the elaboration of the After LIFE Plan (actions F5, F6) the participatory procedures which will be developed shall provide a more substantially coherence between the stakeholders involved and the local authorities in order to multiply the efforts towards implementation.

To increase the awareness of the local community for biodiversity conservation, a Local Biodiversity Protection Group (LBPG) will be established in the area. It will be a group of volunteers (politic, legal, expert, practical). The LBPG will be organized during the first year of the project and act throughout and after the Life project. This LBPG will be trained in monitoring of local biodiversity and threats and will be participated in numerous actions proposed by the project, as volunteers. This will give the opportunity to create a group of local people, which will be able to continue conservation actions and monitoring 73

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

hereafter. The LBPG will investigate all probable opportunities in order to ensure the necessary financial resources and the capacity building providing by European, national and regional funding programmes.

Regional and local volunteers will also be involved in close collaboration with the project beneficiaries and they shall assist by their knowledge and work.

The ecotourism and agri-pastoral activities and the eco-services mechanisms are expected to become economically viable and to be sustained in a long period run. Furthermore, during the Project management activities will be ensured partnership in co-financing schemes. A ÂŤgreen fundÂť shall also be created, under Tilos Park Association responsibility, designated to collect income generated from biodiversity related actions and of sponsors in order to finance future actions and therefore crucially supporting the sustainability of the Project results and of the proposals issued by the Biodiversity Strategy and the sectoral Actions Plans.

The dissemination and awareness activities and documents, provided under the project actions implementation will continue to be used even After LIFE. Reproduction of the dissemination material and documents could be financed directly through other funding lines; Other activities shall be also provided based on the local product, the islands biodiversity, the ecotourism routes which are expected to continue in a self-sustained manner.

Biodiversity Strategy and its Action Plans will deliver solid planning documents and concrete proposals on supplementary funding mechanisms and tools in order to consolidate biodiversity conservation actions in the wider possible perspective and thus can provide to guide the future implementation of an integrated nature and biodiversity approach. Therefore, it will be necessary to secure that the Biodiversity Strategy and the Action Plans shall be continued by the Municipalities and the South Aegean Region, in collaboration with the local stakeholders and the project partners. To this end the Project has incorporate important economic and social factors highlighting the areas that still require substantial development. These developments and deficiencies can provide useful lessons for other conservation agencies using adaptive management to achieve their conservation mandates.

Establishing a forum for regular discourse between scientists, local authorities and managers will be provided a key supplementation to the process developed in this project, linking the objectives hierarchy with operational endpoints further actions to be developed. This ensures the identification of appropriate indicators, whilst developing a joint mental model of the system between scientists and managers (action F7).

In the framework of the Project the LBPG will implement specific management interventions at the project pilot sites, assisting by volunteers, establishing nest boxes for target bird species, erecting signs informative, planting native plants and shrubs to increase habitat heterogeneity, re-establish vegetation in sites where other interventions proved to have poor performance, and promoting awareness of the value of wildlife. The results of the action on the target species populations and distribution will be assessed through the project monitoring action.

A combination of direct and indirect approaches is proposed, with four selected key indicators of diversity that can be derived from related data: productivity, disturbance, topography, and land cover.

Monitoring these indicators through time at an ecosystem level has the potential to provide a national early warning system, indicating where areas of potential biodiversity change may be occurring.

74

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

Protection status under National / local law of sites/species/habitats targeted (if relevant): (Maximum Characters: 5000)

A set of planning documents issued by the project actions, including the After LIFE Plan and its thematic components will be formulated and proposed to the competent Ministries as following: 1. The Regional Biodiversity Strategy, which is proposed as an After LIFE Plan (action F5), focused on the particular characteristics of the small islands, the Biodiversity Monitoring Scheme and the indicators (action F7) will be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change, after the consideration and approval of the Municipal and Regional Council on the basis of an official document. This document could be approved by Law or by Ministerial Degree.

2. The sectoral (thematic) Action Plans, issued by the actions C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 in order to consolidate the project actions results [After LIFE Plan-action F6] will be submitted to the following Ministries: 2.1. Agriculture and pastoralism  The Agri-Pastoral Environment Scheme (AES) will be prepared and submitted to the Ministry of Agriculture in order to be approved by a Ministerial Degree  The guidelines towards an agricultural and pastoral environmental management plan to conserve and enhance biodiversity will submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change to be approved by a Ministerial Degree 2.2. Coastal and Marine environment and fisheries  The guidelines for the coastal wetlands and sand dunes biodiversity conservation will be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change to be approved by a Ministerial Degree  The Hydrological and Beach Modelling and Vulnerability Assessment will be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change to be approved by a Ministerial Degree .  The co-management of the biodiversity and fishery and the designation of new Marine protected areas will be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change to be approved by a Ministerial Degree and thus to be included in the official national inventory concerning the Marine Natura 2000 Network.  The Master Plan for an Integrated Coastal Zone Management in a small islands context will be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change 2.3. Tourism  The Strategic Responsible Tourism Action Plan will be submitted to the Ministry of Tourism In any case the official documents will be submitted to the Ministries after the consideration and approval of the Municipal and Regional Councils during 2020. Local Authorities can use these planning documents in their regular management of the sites of concern.

75

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

How, where and by whom will the equipment acquired be used after the end of the project?

(Maximum Characters: 5000)

All the equipment acquired under the Project actions will be used by the Municipalities after the Project end, related with the location of these equipment.

More particularly the equipment acquired under the action C1 (land cultivation) will be used by the four Municipalities.

The equipment acquired under the action C4 (meteorological station in Tilos) will be property of TPA to continue its use for same purposes after the project end with the assistance of University of Aegean in a volunteers basis.

The equipment acquired under the action C5 (eco-tourism network) and the action E5 (information material) will be used by the four Municipalities Concerning monitoring and other relevantt data, web equipment, dissemination material, etc. will to be property of TPA to continue its use for same purposes after the project end. Particularly monitoring equipment for the coastal and marine biodiversity will be used by TPA with the assistance of HCMR Rhodes in a volunteers basis.

To what extent will the results and lessons of the project be actively disseminated after the end of the project to those persons and/or organisations that could best make use of them (please identify these persons/organisations)? (Maximum Characters: 5000)

All the major results of the demonstration actions of the Project will be further disseminated for a long period (at least 3 years) by the South Aegean Region, the Municipalities involved and the TPA with the assistance of CISD and HSIN, in a volunteer basis.

The Regional Biodiversity Strategy and the sectoral Local Actions Plans and its implementation on a fragile Mediterranean Island ecosystem will be further disseminated for a long period (at least 3 years) by the TPA with the support of HSIN and CISD in a volunteer basis.

The results and lessons of the Project will be further actively disseminated by the Municipalities involved, by the Region in a broader context, and also by scientific partners involved (UAegena and HCMR) through their active participation in international, european, national and regional conferences, workshops and seminars.

The results and lessons of the Project shall also actively disseminated by stakeholders organisations, ecological associations, relative networks, tourst market, etc., such as: o The Hellenic Small Island Network through European and national campaigns and events and by the European Small Islands Network, which promotes such initiatives. o The CISD o The Hellenic Company for the Environment and the Civilization through the Programme «Sustainable Aegean» o The DAFNI network through the Programme «Green Aegean Islands» o The Hellenic Company for the Nature protection 76

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

o The University of the Aegean o The HCMR o The European Centre of Environmental Research and Training of Athens – Panteion University of Athens o The SDMed Association o The Shipping Company «Blue Star Ferries» o The WWF-Hellas o The HELMERA The project results, focused on the demonstration projects impact will be further widespread by CISD and HSIN in a day-to-day management actions and through their participation in International, European and National Fora, workshops, and scientific conferences.

The exchange of information will be ensured for a further promotion of the project results in European, National, Regional and Local level through the web network, the media (press conferences on national and local media, TV, radio, newspapers and magazines, television and radio interviews, articles and television coverage) under the responsibility of CISD. It is also included events which will be held in national and European level such as: (a) project inaugural events in the islands of Rhodes and Kos, (b) special events organized with the view of the international day of Biodiversity, (c) event in the European Environment Week (d) events in the occasion of the International Environment Day (e) events in the occasion of the Word Wetlands Day, etc.

The project objectives and results will be also expanded in the border area through exchange of information activities focused on a better understanding and appreciation of the biodiversity value as a key to move forward business-based mechanisms and to strengthen the wider communication in conservation and management issues organising, inter-alia: a.

Press conferences in Athens per semester.

b.

European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience from other European States of small islands.

c.

Workshops and display campaigns in each island (distribution of promotional material etc.)

d.

Documentaries projection and distribution of promotional material and DVD

e.

Events and happenings in the islands involved, as well as in Rhodes, Kos, Karpathos, etc. advertising sustainable practices, products and services, etc.

How will the long term sustainability of the project's concrete actions be assured? (Maximum Characters: 5000)

In order to assess the sustainability of the project, one should try to determine if various conditions that can assure the continuation of the benefits of the project are satisfied. Examples of such conditions are: Identification: Do the proposal submitting have a clear view on which results they would like to be implemented in a permanent way?

Commitment: Are the local stakeholders sufficiently involved in the project? Are the local (academic)

77

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

authorities supporting the project? Is the project embedded in a larger research initiative : national/regional/international?

Financial: Will there be sufficient money available after the project to continue with its application? Is the necessary infrastructure available and are there provisions for the maintenance of these facilities?

Visibility: Which measures are foreseen to communicate the results of the project to the local community? Will there be an effort to transfer the necessary knowledge and skills ?

However, in order to safely conduct the project the emphasis has to be on certain basic aspects, such as: (a) the adequate knowledge of the context; (b) the operational conditions; (c) the ethical conditions.

Having adequate knowledge of the context needs to ensure the dimension of comprehensiveness in any evaluation by supervision, management, access to information, transparency, scientific freedom, etc. Ensuring operational conditions needs properly organization making clear the objectives to all people involved from the prior time.

Ensuring transparency is also means setting, from the early stage, the rules of the game based on the fairness, the equality of chances between the participants, the absence of any discrimination in the application of the specific actions, etc. taking into consideration to avoid conflict of interests.

The evaluation of the procedures will be provided in every stage satisfying not only the stated objectives but also other considerations, such as the independence of every actor to give his/her judgment and opinion.

A code of conduct will be established to inspire partners, local communities and stakeholders in their mutual relationships.

On this basis has to be organised the management issues which will be followed during the lifetime of the project and the After Life Plan giving emphasis on the social benefits occurs and the view as to the extent them. The information in the financial possibilities needs to be complemented by information on the long-term fiscal sustainability of the project. In this context the results of the project actions shall be easier understood and thus the After LIFE Plan could be constitute an objective of a priority social concern.

The elaboration of the Regional Biodiversity Strategy and the sectoral Action Plans (which are welldescribed in the actions F5 and F6) are decided and planned exclusivity in order to ensure these conditions and thus assuring the long-term sustainability of the project concrete actions and after the lifetime period.

The methodologies, the management issues, the Participatory Planning process adopted based on Environmental Governance principles shall highlight the potential dynamism of the society and of the planning. From the beginning until the Life programme end and the After LIFE period, in every moment and in every stage the local communities will be actively involved following the code of conduct and making things happen.

This Project, based on an integrated approach, could be a very useful tool for a long term conservation of biodiversity addressing local priorities for further actions while assisting regional and local authorities to formulate concrete projects focused on the biodiversity conservation. It shall highlight the huge

78

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

potential of the integrated ecosystem-based approach to the local sustainable development, in a rational and equal prospective, and the relationship between economy, society and environment while sustaining and greening the Local Economy. It could be a milestone one why, in line with the National Biodiversity Plan, elaborated recently, contributing to make the synthesis of all the necessary proposals, to evaluate them and to move forward. A key element is also the integration of biological diversity and ecosystem services concerns into all relevant policy sectors.

Finally, the project, which follows a logical sequence of steps and work on different elements, gives a huge attention in ensuring an operational and effective management scheme (action F1).

In this view the establishment of the Local Biodiversity Protection Group (of scientific, academic, inhabitants, associations, stakeholders and volunteers) was considered vital in assisting management issues while promoting awareness, consulting with individuals and collectivities, identifying gaps; conducting the consultation Workshops; monitoring and reviewing, as also the importance given to the participatory decision making process, nased on environmental governance principles.

79

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - B6

LIFE 2014 – 2020 Natura and Biodiversity TECHNICAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part C Detailed technical description of the proposed actions

80

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C0

A.

Preparatory actions, elaboration of management plans and/or of action plans

B.

Purchase/lease of land and/or compensation payments for use rights

C.

Concrete conservation actions

D.

Monitoring of the impact of the project actions (obligatory)

E.

Public awareness and dissemination of results (obligatory)

F.

Project management and monitoring of project progress (obligatory)

81

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

A.

Preparatory actions, elaboration of management plans and/or of action plans

82

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

A.1

Biodiversity related with grazing land improvement for the production of high quality agricultural and livestock products: Baseline studies

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: University of the Aegean Department of Geography Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) In addition to on-farm management through organic and habitat enhancement practices, the success of biodiversity conservation in protected areas will depend upon how well individual farms are integrated into the wider landscape. Through proper planning at a landscape level, natural and managed areas may be suitably integrated into the landscape in order to reconcile human activities with the goals of biodiversity conservation. In order to best integrate the multiplicity of objectives within protected areas, land managers need effective planning tools to properly manage multi-use areas for the benefit of all interests.

Many ecosystem services approaches represent new opportunities for the sustainable management of species and ecosystems. However, it is important to recognize that while biodiversity is intimately connected to ecosystems services through various relationships, ecosystem services approaches and biodiversity conservation approaches are not always identical pathways for achieving conservation or sustainable natural resource management. Understanding the benefits and limitations of using ecosystem services approaches for achieving biodiversity conservation will help ensure that the finite resources available for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development are used as strategically and effectively as possible to maintain the multiple components of biodiversity and to support human well-being.

This preparatory action will be the base to develop the concrete action C1, where are included the demonstration projects, which will be implemented on each island, aiming at improving land management practices and produce high quality agricultural and livestock products, while protecting and enhancing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources. It will also focus on the transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources, promote education and local awareness through pilot-demonstration projects for the benefit of local economy and sustainable development.

The action is addressed to the four islands concerns. However, demonstration projects of conservation friendly agro pastoral practices and cultivation of cereals, legumes and animal feed plants shall be applied to each island specific area, after consultation and collaboration with local farmers and livestock keepers. This process will re- introduce to farming abandoned land with local species or with species that are very well adapted to local soil and climate conditions with positive impacts on biodiversity, nutrient recycling and long term soil fertility.

Key issues for this action connecting livestock and conservation agriculture is the adoption of key

83

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

principles of the integrated crop-livestock systems to local agro-ecological system, providing the ecological underpinning of production practices, rather than being a compulsory set of prescriptive rules serve as flexible guiding principles to be necessarily adapted to farming practices reflecting the local agro-ecological and socio-economic context.

With specific reference to the integration of animal/crop activities, a clear attention should be given to the specific agro-ecological system and the traditional livestock-keeping practices (including feeding/transhumance practices). Livestock keepers as well as farmers have traditionally adapted to various environmental and climatic changes by building on their in-depth knowledge of the environment in which they live.

In the baseline studies it is important to recognize and described: o

the geographical features of the area,

o

the geological substrate,

o

the geomorphology,

o

the soil types, depth and erosibility,

o

the land cover (from satellite images) and land use, including number of sheep from the censuses and other local data, along with grazing practices from personal interviews with local sheep husbandry farmers.

From these optimal grazing density and capacity, zones and practices will be defined and mapped.

In the implementation studies the proposed actions and their implementation are described based on the findings of the baseline study to define: a.

Description of the proposed actions (The management practices of grazing lands and flocks, lists of animal feed plants for cultivation and their cultivation practices, management plan implemented by all participants, including cultivation practices, economic elements of the farm, marketing channels, resource management, biodiversity and its relationship to other farms, businesses and actors of the area;

b.

The selection process of the stockbreeders who will participate;

c.

List of recommended practices applied by the participants in the process of the implementation of the plan.

The action will be completed following different stages such as: Stage 1: Baseline study In order to move forward, in the first stage the state of the specific productive activity of the islands is studied, the local potential and knowledge on land management is recorded in order to organize better the demonstration projects implementation and plan the necessary interventions.

In the baseline study, the geographical features of the area (climate, geology, soils) are described, local management practices and grazing densities are recorded.

The approach is not limited to grazing management alone, but extends to other activities which affect grazing land management (e.g. hunting). Already existing studies, available for some of the islands, will also be used.

84

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Specifically, the study includes the following sections: a.

Climate, where local meteorological data are presented (precipitation, seasonal differences, temperatures, prevailing winds, etc.);

b.

Geological substrate – Relief, where the relief, slope gradient, exposure, the geology and geomorphology are described;

c.

Soil conditions, including soil types, their physical and chemical qualities, soil depth and erosibility along with slope gradient data;

d.

Land Cover from satellite images, in two different categories, one the major land cover types of CORINE and a more detailed analysis for shurblands, forests and agricultural areas;

e.

Land use, including number of sheep from the censuses and other local data, including regional studies

f.

Grazing practices with the use of material from personal interviews with local sheep husbandry farmers, including grazing densities, seasonal differences, use of feed, etc.;

g.

Grazing density and capacity on the basis of the above data, optimal grazing densities and practices will be discussed and defined.

Stage 2: Implementation study In this study, the proposed actions and their implementation are described based on the findings of the baseline study. Specifically, the study includes the following sections: a

b

Description of the proposed actions: •

The management practices of grazing lands and flocks,

•

The lists of plants for cultivation and information on their cultivation practices,

•

The description of the action/management plan which will be implemented by all participants.

This plan will be developed with the assistance of the administrators of the action and it will include cultivation practices, the economic elements of the farm, marketing channels, resource management, biodiversity and its relationship to other farms, businesses and actors of the area.

The selection process of the stockbreeders who will participate:

This part of the action concerns the pilot application of the interventions which will improve grazing lands and economic results of the farms, while conserving natural resources and biodiversity. The selected farmers will be required to follow the rules/ specifications of the management plan and have to participate in the monitoring and evaluation of its outputs and results. c

List of proposed - selected practices

This list will include all recommended practices which will be supported by the project and will be applied by the participants in the process of the implementation of the plan.

This action will continue in the third stage with the implementation of action C.1., when preparatory actions shall be completed and participants should be selected Monitoring and evaluation of the results and the impacts of the action is presented under action D.1.

85

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Achieving a sustainable and profitable agriculture (minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop rotations) and subsequently ensuring farmers livelihoods is a big challenge.

The integration of livestock and diversification of the commonly specialized production appears to be a natural long term process to achieve resilience, develop strong relations and mutually reinforce activities amongst livestock keepers (including pastoralists and agropastoralists) and farmers. Key conservation agriculture assumption is that satisfactory yields should be achieved by combining agricultural activities with sustainable environmental practices through the enhancement of natural biological processes above and below the ground. Sustainable agriculture represents an innovative paradigm to promote a new approach to management of farming systems and of livestock keeping activities, integrating into the traditional agricultural practices, by developing a holistic approach tailored to local ecosystems.

The results of this action should be combated threats to Biodiversity, due to the unsustainable harvesting of natural resources, including plants and animals, the loss, degradation or fragmentation of ecosystems, while ensuring the sustainability of agriculture and forestry, and the integrating of biodiversity concerns into the development and implementation of other policies.

With respect to agriculture, existing regional policies and instruments under the CAP and the new Multiannual Financial Framework will contribute to this target, enhancing synergies and maximise coherence between biodiversity protection objectives and those of these and other policies.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) It is worth noting that combating uncontrolled and free grazing might arise serious conflicts among farmers and livestock keepers, as livestock is one of the most important income generators for rural families, when encroachment leads to crop cultivation being preferred to pasture. To avoid such conflicts emerging among farmers and herders the focus should be placed on information, education and free choice in order to participate to the demonstration project, integrating financial and other incentive as well as a livestock farming system where food and cash crops, livestock and value-added processing shall be combined within the framework of conservation agriculture practices over village landscapes and watersheds.

Animal and crops are seen as two complementary activities at the core of a comprehensive management of natural resources. In light of this, it is crucial to monitor and control the number of animals grazing and the grazing duration (the stocking rate/exposure time) as well as the type, the timing of grazing, the soil fertility and the soil composition.

Furthermore, this could contribute to manage potential conflicts among livestock keepers and farmers as both activities become complementary with greater benefits to both sides. Such complementarity depends also on the grazing management adopted which needs to be adapted to the local circumstances in respect of the landâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s livestock carrying capacity, the land condition, the quality and quantity of forages and the rainfall .

A sustainable grazing management is needed to maintain a healthy and productive pasture ensuring at the same time good level of physical and chemical soil fertility. Hence, the quality of the grazing land is ensured as well as the soil productiveness.

But, the most important, in order to attract environmentally concerned farmers for their farmland,

86

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

efficient tools and financial mechanisms have to be used, such as land trusts, short-term leasing with terms that are simple to monitor.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Integrating crop-livestock systems promotes a sustainable use and management of land and natural resources. To this end, long term benefits are also expected in terms of soil quality and productivity.

Since conservation agriculture's emphasis on minimizing soil disturbance and keeping soil covered at all times, allows the soil to hold water far longer and facilitates deeper rooting of crops. This results in adaptation against drought as well as against excessive rainfall preventing floods though better water infiltration.

Adopting mixed systems as a cost and labor saving approach for small holder farmers, especially to the farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; households without sufficient power of labor. These integrated systems reduce the drudgery and work load in the field, thus saving time which could be dedicated to do other things, such as income diversification, off-farm employment, attending learning events or taking care of household chores and more time with family and children.

The expected results should offered positive impacts on (a) the profitability of farms, making farming more attractive and helping in retaining the younger population of the islands by providing another livelihood option; (b) the cooperation between farmers and farmers and other local actors by providing practical ways of improving land management practices and avoiding existing local conflict on the use of land, especially in relation with grazing; (c) the collaboration with the private sector, integrated croplivestock systems as an opportunity to develop livestock-related business activities, facilitating access to finance, equipment and machinery.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action A1 is an action which prepare the full implementation of measures and demonstration projects, which are addressed to the four islands. It is evident that the progress made under this preparatory action is not possible to be measured, without having in hand the results of the action C1, after its implementation. It is also important to notice that action C1 is the key concrete action for the implementation of agri and pastural practices.

However, progress made under this action shall be mesured by cording and evaluating only social impacts relating with commitments made with the local farmers and livestock keepers.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The cost of baseline, implementation studies and follow up sub-actions will be estimated per deliverable in relation with (a) traveling and personnel costs; (b) infrastructure costs.

87

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

A.2 Marine Coastal assessment of the Natura sites: review of protection and conservation actions

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HCMR Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action, which is focused to the study of the Marine and Coastal Biodiversity of the concerned south Aegean small island's area, wich is already included in the Greek Natura network (implementation of the Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC), prepares the implementation of the concrete action C2. A review of the existing data will be carried out and the possibility of a new design of these Natura sites. Indeed, most of the existing maps have been produced 15 years ago and in many cases the information from the 6 years reporting (according to the Article 17 of the Habitat Directive) has not been included.

Coastal area and the State of the marine environment will be studied and registered as well as fishery fleet, and fishery practices on the base of the data associated with landings of catches, as well as data that will arise from the study of the biology of these species More data from analytical registration on the typology of coastal fishery fleet, (production, fishing fleet capacity, fishing techniques, fishing organizations, etc.) will be produced and studied in order to promote a sustainable and responsible fishery in the study area.

All the sensitive fishing areas presenting some peculiarities (spawning areas, recruitment areas) will be recorded in order to provide, through management measures that will be proposed, a special protection of these areas.

Fishery database study of the marine fishery resources and stocks will be provided for the assessment of the fisheries resources in the coastal waters of the marine area between the islands in the E. Aegean Sea through identification of the fishery resources, estimation of their abundance and biodiversity, their geographical and bathymetrical distribution in relation to size and sex, the structure of their population, the feeding strategies of the most commercial species, the estimation of coastal resources assemblages etc).

In addition to the biological parameters of the most commercial fishery resources will be studied (e.g. length distribution, length-weight relationships and reproduction aspects). The samples will come from coastal fishing boats, in a seasonal basis, after close cooperation with coastal fishermen from each island.

This action is necessary to prepare the elaboration and the implementation of relatives conservation actions (C2) and demonstration projects for marine coastal habitats in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (mainly the priority habitat type 1120 “Posidonia meadows” and the habitat type 8330 “marine caves”, which is important habitat in the life cycle of the Mediterranean monk seal. On the base of this action shall be developed and implemented a concrete monitoring of the marine coastal habitats with halting the loss of biodiversity (Action D2).

The small islands of Chalki, Nisyros, Tilos and Symi belong to the Greek South Aegean Archipelago and

88

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

consist a part of EU’s maritime eastern borders. Although worldwide famous for their geo- and biodiversity, since the last decade of the 20th century they are facing a rapid increase in tourism activity.

Action 2 aims to contribute to the development of a Master Plan for Integrated Coastal Zone Management, based on Barcelona Convention and the relevant EU Directives and Regulations.

In the context of this Action all relevant parameters will be studied in order to pave the path towards a sustainable management of the marine environment. This will include the recording and assessing of marine biodiversity, the impact of exotic species in endemic fish fauna in the research area and the analytical study of fishery resources for the improvement of their sustainable management and. In addition, proposals for alternative professional activities of anglers, such as fishing tourism as well as a project for the creation and implementation of artificial reefs will be developed.

The general objectives of the actions A1 and C1 are the promotion of the coastal and marine biodiversity and co-management of the natural environment with the fisheries in the small islands of South Aegean.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is necessary to prepare the elaboration and the implementation of relatives conservation actions (C2) and demonstration projects for marine coastal habitats in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (mainly the priority habitat type 1120 “Posidonia meadows” and the habitat type 8330 “marine caves”, which is important habitat in the life cycle of the Mediterranean monk seal. On the base of this action shall be developed and implemented a concrete monitoring of the marine coastal habitats with halting the loss of biodiversity (Action D2). The objective is referred to the mapping and assessment of the seafloor with emphasis on the habitat types included in the Habitat Directive and the EU Regulation for the Mediterranean Fisheries to allow for their effective protection. To this end creation and organization of the necessary data is necessary in order to facilitate applying the necessary fisheries management measures in both areas of research.

Determination of the quality and of threats to seabird foraging areas and a comprehensive and welldesigned management guideline based on scientific data is an essential tool for the effective management and conservation of seabird foraging grounds on Posidonia beds.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The kind of constrains which will be developed through this action implementation may be: 

Stakeholder don’t accept the project: In thw case new, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed



Stakeholder don‟t trust each other: In this case the scientific project partners are independent and adopt a neutral position for a balanced discussion and participation



There is less participation: In this case, new, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Adequate and scientifically sound datasets of the type, size distribution and quality of foraging sites, with special reference to Posidonia beds and datasets of the distribution and abundance of target 89

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

species will be produced to allow for foraging ground quality assessment and preparation of the management guidelines.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) All the data obtained from the project will be evaluated and can be used for an assessment of future management structures based on the ecosystem service approach. The criteria of the evaluation will be based on the CBD Decision 9/20, which are: Uniqueness or rarity, special importance for life-history stages of species, importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats, vulnerability, Fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery, biological productivity, biological diversity and naturalness.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

For estimating the costs of the main expenditures related to the preparatory action A2 the following methodology has been used: The stuff effort has been estimated according the man months above all involved in analyses and elaborations. Another part of the budget is travel costs of the personnel in the study area taking into account the expenses for travel and daily allowances, personnel expenses, consumables. The funding of new equipment will be limited to set up dedicated instruments, consumables laboratory processing samples and vesselâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operative costs, travel.

90

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

A.3

Coastal wetlands and sand dunes biodiversity relating with floods prevention and climate change: preparing protection and conservation actions and demonstration projects

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: University of Aegean Department of Marine Sciences in collaboration with Citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Inspectorate for Sustainable Development - CISD Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action aims at the study of the small coastal wetlands and the sand dunes ecosystems biodiversity, in order to prepare the implementation of the concrete actions which are described under action C3 aiming at the protection and conservation of the Coastal Biodiversity. The action is focused on the study of the coastal biodiversity and sand dunes ecosystems as priority habitats (dir. 92/43 EEC) and as natural flood prevention and natural formations, in order to prepare the implementation of concrete demonstration projects, which will be located in the island of Tilos and more particularly, whwrw operations will be done: 1. in the small wetland (0,2 acres) of Livadia on the island of Tilos, which is of a great importance, designated as Habitat type 3170 (Mediterranean temporary ponds), but it is constantly shrinking due to human intervention and tourism infrastructure pressures and 2. in relatively extensive sand dunes structures located in Tilos Island (Eristos and Skafi), which are a common habitat in Greece (habitat type 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes), where, due to human activities, associated with tourism development on sandy beaches, important degradation occurs.

Protection and conservation measures of the wetland and sand dunes are necessary, not only because of coastal wetlands and sand dunes important biodiversity but also because of sand dunes importance as natural mechanisms of flood control against sea level rise. These measures will provide information on conservation needs assessment to guide a specific management plan, including restoration actions (if needed), which could be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness and add value to the area.

The action is based on a detailed study and recording of physical characteristics and biodiversity of the wetland and sand dunes, and shall provide: (i) Beach Environmental Database including: a.

seasonal hydrological regime,

b.

basic water quality parameters-pH,

c.

nitrates, phosphates, dissolved oxygen, BOD etc.

91

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

d.

possible pollution inputs,

e.

biodiversity recordings (plant species, bird species, insect species, amphibians etc.),

f.

invasive species and

g.

assessment of importance and human pressures.

(ii) Fieldwork and Pilot Beach Experiments including: a.

Topographic/bathymetric information (cross shore profiles and shoreline positions) across beach sections will be obtained from overlapping topographic and bathymetric data, which will be collected using a TopCon RTK GPS and a Hi-Target HD370 hydrographic echosounder.Onshore (inner) beach boundaries of the profiles, set as the seaward margins of either vegetated dunes and coastal cliffs or artificial structures (e.g. seawalls, coastal roads and permanent buildings), whereas bathymetric information will be collected to an appropriate distance and depth for the correct use during modeling.

b.

Repeated onshore surveys (2-3 times during the project duration), whereas beach profiles is envisaged to be collected, mainly during stormy periods, by specifically-trained municipality employees.

c.

Sediment samples from each topographic section, analyzed to estimate grain size distributions/parameters (Mz, Md, Sk and Ď&#x192;) that are used to classify beach sediments.

d.

Inshore morphological survey carried out using a high-resolution side scan sonar for shallow waters (< 20 m depth), so as to achieve mapping of the shallow water habitats.

e.

The wider wave regime and the annual wave heights and periods for intense storm conditions (frequency of occurrence < 1%)

f.

Meteorological, soil data and in-situ measurements together with laboratory analyses, which will be used for the study of flood and drought phenomena and their modelling.

These measures will provide information on conservation needs assessment to guide a specific management plan, including restoration actions (if needed), which could be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness and add value to the area. More specifically, the main objectives of the proposed action are to: i.

provide a first assessment of the potential erosion of the beaches of Tilos (Livadia, Eristos and Skafi) with a natural and ecological value, evaluating the range of potential retreat of these beaches under different scenaria of short- and long-term sea level rise through the use of suitable ensembles of parametric and numerical morphodynamic models;

ii.

develop an easily accessible database of the spatial characteristics of all the island beaches involved in the project (Nisyros, Symi, Tilos, Chalki), using readily available (web-based) remote sensing information;

iii.

assess the accuracy/sensitivity of remote-sensed images that provide information on beach spatial characteristics (e.g. beach width), through specifically targeted and detailed ground truth experiments in Tilos;

iv. detailed mapping of the coastal zone (both onshore and inshore) including the surficial distribution of the inshore habitats; v.

study the dynamics and assess the impacts of the ephemeral riverine sediment supply at the

92

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

coastal drainage basins of Tilos as a case study area; vi. collaborate with local authorities and install permanently a weather station in Tilos and train local students and municipal employees on (a) periodic retrieval of the weather station data, (b) data analysis, (c) constant beach profile measurements (d) the use of a database for beach retreat projections, especially after stormy events.

On the other hand, the action shall contribute to the development of a database of the spatial (and â&#x20AC;&#x201C; where available- other geo-environmental) characteristics of the four island beaches (Nisyros, Tilos, Symi, Chalki), using widely-available, web-based information; this database could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g. Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive)).

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is necessary to prepare the elaboration and the implementation of relatives conservation actions (C3) and demonstration projects for small coastal wetlands and sand dunes in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (dir. 92/43 EEC) and as natural flood prevention and natural formations. On the base of this action shall be developed and implemented a concrete monitoring the relation of small wetland and Dune with halting the loss of biodiversity and climate change (D3).

A much better understanding of the risks and vulnerability associated with climate-change driven erosion, is required for the development of appropriate adaptation measures, which enhance the longterm sustainability of beaches and their multiple ecologic and socio-economic uses. Climate change and particularly the (long- and short-term) sea level rise controls beach erosion, as beaches respond to the rising sea levels with retreat and/or drowning.

Beach erosion is particularly damaging for South Aegean Islands beaches. At the same time, beaches represent a most valuable natural resource, being the main focus of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sun and beachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; tourism which affects the beach carrying capacity.

The sustainability of the beach-based tourism will be challenged by the increasing beach erosion and the inundation/damage of the coastal environment and of the related infrastructure. Furthermore, beaches provide dynamic protection to the coastal environments, they front and interrelate with coastal habitats. They are not only important ecological habitats in their own right but also front/protect from sea inundation and flooding other significant coastal habitats and valuable coastal economic assets/infrastructure such as urban and industrial developments and coastal roads, railways and airports. Moreover, as tourism has become almost synonymous with beach recreational activities beaches form an extremely important economic resource for many coastal and island States.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The objective of the present contribution is to develop coastal hazard data bases as well as methodologies/tools to assess the vulnerability of coastal systems to sea level rise/extreme events.

However, these tools face several limitations in respect of their coastal retreat/inundation forecasts (due to e.g. lack of coastal Digital Elevation Models with appropriate accuracy resolution and of other necessary input parameters such as coastal hydrodynamic information.

Satellite images combined with in situ investigations in Tilos will allow for the mapping (and correlation) 93

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

of the spatial characteristics of the islands beaches, together with other attributes such as geology/topography, sediment texture, the presence of coastal works and other coastal infrastructure and accessibility. Topographic/bathymetric information (crossshore profiles and shoreline positions) across beach sections will be obtained from overlapping topographic and bathymetric data, which will be collected using a TopCon RTK DGPS and a Hi-Target HD370 hydrographic echosounder.

The onshore (inner) beach boundaries of the profiles will set as the seaward margins of either vegetated dunes and coastal cliffs or artificial structures (e.g. seawalls, coastal roads and permanent buildings), whereas bathymetric information will be collected to an appropriate distance and depth for the correct use during modeling. Sediment samples will also be collected from each topographic section; these will be analysed to estimate grain size distributions/parameters that are used to classify beach sediments.

The inshore morphological survey will be carried out using a high-resolution side scan sonar for shallow waters (< 20 m depth), so as to achieve mapping of the shallow water habitats. The wave regime will be abstracted from the Wind and Wave Atlas of the Hellenic Seas (Soukissian et al. 2007) and the annual wave heights and periods for intense storm conditions (frequency of occurrence < 1%) will be studied.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The action contributes to ensure the implementation of the action C3 and together they will significantly enhance our knowledge/advance research in beach processes and morphodynamic modeling, the monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc.

Moreover, it will benefit the National Administration, local authorities and other stakeholders as well as the general public through the creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches, also permitting a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox.

The proper studies will support the application of multidisciplinary research approaches/techniques summarized below: - Development of a rapid technique to create a database of the spatial and other geo-environmental characteristics of the four island beaches using widely-available, web-based information, which will be a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g.

Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive)).

- Predictions of ranges of beach retreats for different long- and short-term sea level rise scenarios and differential hydrodynamic, morphological, and sedimentological beach characteristics providing a prognostic coastal management tool, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools.

- Study of the dynamics of the sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins on the basis of hydrological modeling and field observations with particular emphasis on extreme events. It is envisaged that this work will assist in the development of improved scientific approaches to monitor/model sediment loads and yields and assess water/sediment discharges of the small island drainage basins.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Beach retreat (erosion) due to sea level changes is assessed mostly through the development/

94

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

application of parametric/analytical and/or process-response models (e.g. Van Rijn et al. 2003).

The main advantage of the former is their simplicity; however, such models cannot resolve beach changes due to high frequency events, in contrast to the more complex process-response models that are based on the coupling of hydrodynamic and sediment dynamic numerical modules. In the present study, 3 cross-shore (1-D) parametric/analytical models (the Bruun (1988), Edelman (1972) and Dean (1991) models) and 3 cross-shore process-response (numerical) morphodynamic models (SBEACH, Leontâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;yev and XBeach) have been used to form suitable model ensembles to simulate long- and shortterm beach retreats due to mean sea level changes and storm surges, respectively.

This approach is based on the concept that since different models have differential sensitivity to the controlling factors, their common (ensemble) application may provide more balanced predictions.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The estimation of the costs includes: (a) personnel costs; (b) infrastructure costs; (c) traveling costs and also (d) sampling costs concerning the selection of information on the Seasonal Hydrological Regime, including basic water quality parameters (pH, nitrates, phosphates, dissolved oxygen, BOD etc.) and pollution inputs.

95

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

A.4

Tourism impact on biodiversity: preparing an active and responsible community-based tourism

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: University of Aegean, Department of the Environment / Laboratory of Local and Island Development with the collaboation of Citizen’s Inspectorate for Sustainable Development - CISD

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Responding to a critical question «Can tourism help biodiversity?», together with local and indigenous communities, whose lives and culture are linked with it, this action has to prove that the tourism sector and its operations have been beneficial to supporting, nurturing and enhancing biodiversity.

This preparatory action is necessary to allow the start or proper implementation of this project action related with a biodiversity-based and Community-based tourism product development and it is directly linked with the other project preparatory actions, such as A1, A2, A3, which concern the integration of good practices on Agriculture, Pastoral, Fisheries, Coastal and Marine Sustainable Management.

This actions will support and assist the implementation of the elaborated management plans and action plans which are foreseen through continuous collaboration with competent authorities, market stakeholders involved, tour operators, tourist agencies, private sector, hotels, restaurants, etc., by open consultation and participatory process, as well as by providing technical and scientific assistance for the adoption of the proposals.

A sufficient set of explanations, guidelines, documentation, specialised guides (biodiversity and tourism, local products and gastronomy, particular spot of interest, etc.), commitments, etc., will be provided to enforce the full implementation after the project is effectively ensured.

More particularly the following sub-actions will be developed: (a) Preliminary studies and assessment: 

Development of the methodology in order to define the information and the analysis needed



Delineation of the area. Data collection and analysis of :Current Tourism development and its social, economic and environmental results, economic, social and environmental state at local level; the other economic sectors and their impact to the islands;



Objectives and Analysis of the action plan requirements

96

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(b) Preparation of the implementation procedure to provide an Alternative Tourism network based on Nature, Biodiversity, Geology and Culture and Ecotourism and Geo-tourism network and accessibility; A full inventory of resources concerning existing infrastructures, activities related to tourism and the nature, biodiversity and cultural particularities of the four case study islands shall be prepared in order to investigate possibilities of developing activities on ecotourism, nature tourism and alternative tourism, providing value to local communities and preserve and enhance natural and geological heritage.

Important attractions-tourism resources associated with tourism in nature shall be recorded (baseline information) taking into consideration all sources of knowledge, including available information, as appropriate, on: - Existing tourism market structures and local policies at the regional and local level; - Processes of the action plan application; - Environmental and biodiversity resources and processes, including any special features and sites of particular importance and protected areas, and identifying those resources that may be off bounds to development due to their particular fragility and those resources identified by existing analysis of threats; - Cultural resources; - National biodiversity strategies and policies, and local applications; - Legislation and control measures and local applications; All stakeholders shall contribute relevant information to this process, including indigenous and local communities, building a capacity-building and training mechanism to assist stakeholders in documenting, accessing, analysing and interpreting baseline information. Collation and synthesis of information provided will need to be undertaken by an appropriately qualified team, drawing on a range of expertise, including expertise in tourism and in biodiversity issues, and in traditional knowledge and innovation systems. In order to ensure that all relevant information, its credibility and reliability, are considered, all stakeholders should be involved in review of the collated baseline information available, and in the synthesis of this information.

Baseline information shall include maps, geographical information systems and other visual tools, including already identified zoning schemes.

Tourism products based on biodiversity and in conserved natural heritage must possess all the features of sustainable tourism products. These features emphasize nature conservation and promotion, provide additional sources of income for the management bodies of protected natural heritage and represent a basis for solving economic and social problems of local communities. In such a vision products and services must be in accordance with the environmental capacities and the concept of eco-destination. It is important to create authentic experiences which cannot be achieved in other places, aiming at a better experiencing nature (cycling, climbing, hiking and boating) in parallel with local hospitality, introducing alternative means of transport.

This project action shall be directly related with the other preparatory actions to exchange information and experience, and to take advantage of other elements and relevant data.

Ensuring a high quality of natural environment in a high holiday destination, as are the selected small South Aegean Islands, is an increasingly important success factor for most - if not all - types of tourism.

Coasts, mountains, rivers, forests and wildlife are major attractions for tourists and every destination

97

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

relies on natural resources and their related ecosystem services. Moreover, as the awareness of the fragility of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most pristine environments continues to increase, the demand for sustainable tourism products, which can contribute to preserve the environment and to enhance the livelihoods of local communities, is growing.

Based the tourism product on biodiversity and ecosystem services values, addressing new sustainable practices and local high quality products and services with added sustainable value at attractive prices is the only way to attract ecologically aware tourists, to maximize positive benefits of tourism to biodiversity, ecosystems, and also to local economies and social development, while minimizing negative social and environmental impacts.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Despite the diversification of the global tourism market and the growing importance of special interest forms of tourism, coastal and beach tourism is still the dominant segment in terms of number of tourists.

Coastal and island destinations experience an increasing pressure on their natural and cultural resources, due to the ever increasing demand and tourists activities that are highly concentrated in time and space (seasonality, infrastructure and tourism operations in a narrow coastal zone).

Promoting sustainable tourism, which means all nature-based forms of tourism in which the main motivation of the tourists is the observation and appreciation of nature as well as the traditional cultures prevailing in natural areas, should be achieved major benefits.

This preparatory action is necessary to allow the start or proper implementation of this project action related with a biodiversity-based and Community-based tourism product development and it is directly linked with the other project preparatory actions, such as A1, A2, A3, A5 and A6 to integrate Best Practices on Biodiversity, Agriculture, Pastoral, Fisheries, Coastal and Marine Sustainable Management.

This actions will support and assist the implementation of the elaborated management plans and action plans which are foreseen through continuous collaboration with competent authorities, market stakeholders involved, tour operators, tourist agencies, private sector, hotels, restaurants, etc., by open consultation and participatory process, as well as by providing technical and scientific assistance for the adoption of the proposals.

A sufficient set of explanations, guidelines, documentation, specialised guides (biodiversity and tourism, local products and gastronomy, particular spot of interest, etc.), commitments, etc., will be provided to enforce the full implementation after the project is effectively ensured.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Probably difficulties in timetable might been appear. The effort to involve different social groups in such a difficult project may cause delays or disagreements. Extensive discussions with all parties involved, can resolve many issues. Also all parties will be bound by a contract of good cooperation and commitment to public participation.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This actions will support and assist the implementation of the elaborated management plans and action

98

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

plans which are foreseen through continuous collaboration with competent authorities, market stakeholders involved, tour operators, tourist agencies, private sector, hotels, restaurants, etc., by open consultation and participatory process, as well as by providing technical and scientific assistance for the adoption of the proposals. A sufficient set of explanations, guidelines, documentation, specialised guides (biodiversity and tourism, local products and gastronomy, particular spot of interest, etc.), commitments, etc., will be provided to enforce the full implementation after the project is effectively ensured.

The vision, the objectives and goals of this action (A4 + C4) form the basis of the national and regional strategies or master plans for sustainable development of tourism in relation to biodiversity. This process may also be undertaken at more local levels by local government, and by communities at community level. Where local and community level vision and goals for tourism and biodiversity have been set, these may be taken into account by governments when preparing the national level vision and goals, for example through workshops at the local level supporting sustainable tourism governance and management.

On the other hand, sustainable tourism approaches shall contributed for reducing pollution, contamination and environmental degradation from coastal tourism demonstrated in the South Aegean Small Islands context; Providing a medium-long term strategy to achieve sustainable and competitive South Aegean tourism, by implementing eco-tourism and biodiversity paths network, demonstration projects, specific activities and relative guidelines, stakeholders should undertake the necessary steps to strengthen the contribution of sustainable practices to facilitate the competitiveness of South Aegean Region as the most attractive tourism destination.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) A monitoring and control system shall be developed (C4 +D4) to measure progress achieved on biological diversity and tourism activities management in relation to the impacts of tourism on biodiversity, taking into account the timescale for ecosystem changes to become evident.

Long-term monitoring and assessment provide a means for detecting adverse effects that may arise from tourism activities and development in relation to biodiversity, so that action can be taken to control and mitigate such effects.

Developers and operators of tourism facilities and activities should be required to report periodically to designated authorities and to the public on compliance with conditions set out in approvals, and on the condition of biodiversity and the environment in relation to the tourism facilities and activities for which they are responsible.

Prior to the commencement of any new tourism development or activities, an inclusive monitoring and reporting system should be put in place, with indicators to track how tourism actions are mitigating threats to biodiversity, along with agreed upon quantifiable standards indicating thresholds of acceptable change. These should be developed in conjunction with all key stakeholders including indigenous and local communities. Indicators to cover aspects of management of biodiversity and sustainable tourism, including socio-economic and cultural aspects, should also be identified and monitored at global, national, and local levels.

99

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of the main expenditures in the action is estimated taking into consideration the personnel costs, the travel costs and the costs for meetings and workshops.

100

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

C. Concrete conservation actions

101

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

C.1

Grazing land improvement and demonstration projects for the production of high quality agricultural and livestock products

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: University of the Aegean Department of Geography Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action follows the action A1 and aims at: a) improving land management practices, producing high quality agricultural and livestock products, while protecting and enhancing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources; b) reducing overgrazing; c) protecting the local environment through the application of good cultivation practices, including fallow, rotational cultivation and of agricultural and animal husbandry management practices, including the use of livestock zones for a sustainable management of grazing lands; d) producing high quality products with the improvement of feed or the production of new plant products; e) improving the economic viability of livestock farms by reducing their dependence on animal feed (their most significant expense today); f) improving the economic viability of farms with the production of higher added value products: g) avoiding local conflicts and disputes on the management of grazing lands; Demonstration projects shall be implemented in each site area concerning agri and pastoral environmental practices for the cultivation of cereals, legumes and animal feed plants to reduce overgrazing and biodiversity loss. These projects shall be operated by selecting participants which will agree to use their farms following: 1. Description of the proposed interventions; 2. Selection process of the stockbreeders who will participate; 3. List of proposed - selected practices; 4. Preparation of agri-environmental and pastural management plans for the participants; 5. Description of the action/management plan which will be implemented, which will include: cultivation practices; economic elements of the farm; marketing channels; resource management; biodiversity and its relationship to other farms; businesses and actors of the area; 102

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

6. Implementation of the proposed actions, through demonstration projects; 7. Provision of guidelines towards an agricultural and pastoral environmental management plan to conserve and enhance biodiversity; 8. Follow-up actions;

Sub-actions C.1.1. Selection of the participants The participation is voluntary and the participants should be active farmers and stockbreeders. They should be owners of cultivated lands or rent them with long-term contracts (at least, until the end of the actions) in areas which are larger than 5 ha. The participation of the stockbreeders who will participate to the pilot application of the interventions which will improve grazing lands and economic results of the farms, while conserving natural resources and biodiversity is voluntary and the participants should be active stockbreeders. They will be selected after information and training workshops, which will be conducted from the beginning of the action A1 and may include: (a) owners of cultivated lands or rent them with long-term contracts (at least, until the end of the actions) in areas which are larger than 5 ha; (b) owners of grazing lands or rent them with long-term contracts (at least, until the end of the actions) in areas which are larger than 5 ha.

A study of terms, conditions and means of implementation of the demonstration projects is the key element in order to organise better the status of local farmers and mainly the crops and the equipements financing. In the case that teh farmers will be subcontracted they could use their equipment and past experience to cultivate local varieties of cereal and fodder crops, to provide food for wildlife and for the livestock that will be using in the demonstration pastoral plots. Livestock keepers willing to be involved in the demonstration actions will use the demonstration pasture plots, after signing agreements with the Municipality, and providing commitment that they will fully respect the prescriptions.

The motivation for the livestock keepers is the improvement of the pastureland and the improvement of the quality of their products. The selected farmers, stockbreeders and livestock keepers will be required to follow the rules/ specifications of the management plan and have to participate in the monitoring and evaluation of its outputs and results.

C.1.2. Managing the demonstration projects implementation This sub-action includes the cultivation practices, the economic elements of the farm, marketing channels, resource management, biodiversity and its relationship to other farms, businesses and actors of the area. The laying down of the management plans, concerning two complementary interventions, farming and grazing, include A. B.

Agri-environmental projects implementation Demonstration cultivation projects

Demonstration projects for the cultivation of cereals, legumes and/or animal feed plants will be implemented in each island and will concern the production of seeds for sale (legumes, chickpeas) and cereals for flour (gluten -free wheat mostly) that can be sold or used for baking locally and iii animal feed plants. Thus resulting the re- introduce to farming abandoned land with local species or with

103

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

species that are very well adapted to local soil and climate conditions with positive impacts on biodiversity, nutrient recycling and long term soil fertility introducing, such as: a) cultivation practices; b) economic elements of the farm; c) marketing channels; d) resource management, biodiversity and the relationship of the farm with other farms and to other businesses and actors of the area; e) practices which will be eligible for funding by this action, such as infrastructure costs, seed costs, farming supplies and inputs, promotion costs, costs required to cover the installation of quality schemes.

Demonstration projects may also be implemented in traditional terraces aiming at revitalizing traditional cultivation and increase large insect, Chukar partridge and migratory bird food availability, by provision of cereal food supply.

The management plans will be implemented for a period of no less than 2 years, preferably 3 years.

During this period, the participants should follow the rules of the management plan. Failing to do so they will be turned down must return the money they have received, unless the management plan is modified in cooperation with the scientific responsible of the action. Also, they should cooperate with the scientific and management responsible persons and they should assist the monitoring of the action.

C.

Pastoral environmental project implementation.

The proposed interventions in this field are: 1. The management practices of grazing lands and flocks; 2. Lists of all recommended practices which will be supported by the project and will be applied by the participants in the process of the implementation of the plan; 3. Description of the action/management plan which will be implemented by all participants.

Plot fences will be repaired and improved, to regulate grazing pressure, according to the prescriptions, seasonally and spatially, while also moving fences will be tested to ensure rotational grazing. Controlled grazing will be applied by the local livestock (sheep - goats), ensuring the continuation of grazing activities in a biodiversity compatible way.

The size of the demonstration livestock herds, will be decided in relation to the site carrying capacity and the pastureland management plan prescriptions. The local livestock keepers that will provide their herds for the demonstration action will be assisted by the project wardens, to increase the available man power and facilitate the more intensive herding and surveillance of the flocks.

The participants should follow the rules of the management plan. Failing to do so they will be turned down must return the money they have received, unless the management plan is modified in cooperation with the scientific responsible of the action. Also, they should cooperate with the scientific and management responsible persons and they should assist the monitoring of the action.

C.1.3. Market-based mechnisms and financial tools The combination of the funding by the project with additional funding from other businesses and banks

104

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

can cover needs which may result from the management plan will not be covered by the participants or by the project. The target is to attract financial proposals which will cover the total production circuit.

These proposals will ensure cash availability for stockbreeders in order to purchase the necessary animal feed but also the agricultural supplies.

Other actions which could be partially financed by the project and partially by other actions can be: i.

the definition of designated grazing areas on the basis of the studies that will be completed;

ii. processing, standardization and certification of products, which are not eligible for funding by the project, such certifications can include organic products, integrated management products, zero carbon footprint products, among others; iii. links between farms and local sales and tourism points, which are not eligible for funding by the project; iv. the creation of a model farm that could be visited and local products displayed, where also good practices can be demonstrated.

C.1.4. Monitoring: Taking into account the outputs of the actions A1 will be specifically evaluated the following: Outputs: (a) Economic output of the project: (i) commitments and (ii) payments; (b) Physical output: (i) Areas, (ii) Number of beneficiaries, (iii) Amount of production; Results: (a) Financial results: (i) Annual input â&#x20AC;&#x201C; output of the participants in â&#x201A;Ź, (ii)% change of the produced products (milk, meat, biomass); (b) Biodiversity: (i) Annual herbaceous biomass measurements in grazing land and "control " areas, (ii) Annual land cover measurements and pant diversity in grazing land and in "control "areas.

Impacts: (a) Economic sustainability: (i) Farm results and participants opinion; (b) Eco systemic processesservices: Estimation based on measurements of the diversity and the productivity.

C.1.5. Training-Eduction and Dissemination of the action results will be provided (described in the action E1) Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Achieving a sustainable and profitable agriculture (minimal soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop rotations) and subsequently ensuring farmers livelihoods is a big challenge.

The integration of livestock and diversification of the commonly specialized production appears to be a natural long term process to achieve resilience, develop strong relations and mutually reinforce activities amongst livestock keepers (including pastoralists and agropastoralists) and farmers. Key conservation agriculture assumption is that satisfactory yields should be achieved by combining agricultural activities with sustainable environmental practices through the enhancement of natural biological processes 105

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

above and below the ground. Sustainable agriculture represents an innovative paradigm to promote a new approach to management of farming systems and of livestock keeping activities, integrating into the traditional agricultural practices, by developing a holistic approach tailored to local ecosystems.

Stockbreeders and farmers will be involved and participate in the demonstration actions while the rest of the local society will see the results and realize the benefits of nature conservation (environmental and economic) to local societies and therefore will make them more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future.

This action, due to its demonstration character, will transfer information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources and consequently, it will prove that nature conservation and economic activities are not only possible but they can be profitable, which can be a far reaching future impact for the area.

The results should be combated threats to Biodiversity, due to the unsustainable harvesting of natural resources, including plants and animals, the loss, degradation or fragmentation of ecosystems, while ensuring the sustainability of agriculture integrating biodiversity concerns into other policies.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) It is worth noting that combating uncontrolled and free grazing might arise serious conflicts among farmers and livestock keepers, as livestock is one of the most important income generators for rural families, when encroachment leads to crop cultivation being preferred to pasture. To avoid such conflicts emerging among farmers and herders the focus should be placed on information, education and free choice in order to participate to the demonstration project, integrating financial and other incentive as well as a livestock farming system where food and cash crops, livestock and value-added processing shall be combined within the framework of conservation agriculture practices over village landscapes and watersheds.

Animal and crops are seen as two complementary activities at the core of a comprehensive management of natural resources. In light of this, it is crucial to monitor and control the number of animals grazing and the grazing duration (the stocking rate/exposure time) as well as the type, the timing of grazing, the soil fertility and the soil composition.

Furthermore, this could contribute to manage potential conflicts among livestock keepers and farmers as both activities become complementary with greater benefits to both sides. Such complementarity depends also on the grazing management adopted which needs to be adapted to the local circumstances in respect of the landâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s livestock carrying capacity, the land condition, the quality and quantity of forages and the rainfall .

A sustainable grazing management is needed to maintain a healthy and productive pasture ensuring at the same time good level of physical and chemical soil fertility. Hence, the quality of the grazing land is ensured as well as the soil productiveness. But, the most important, in order to attract environmentally concerned farmers for their farmland, efficient tools and financial mechanisms have to be used, such as land trusts, short-term leasing with terms that are simple to monitor.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Integrating crop-livestock systems, by demonstration projects capitalising on indigenous knowledge, shall promote a sustainable use and management of land and natural resources, while protecting

106

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

biodiversity.

Other impacts are: a) profitability of farms, making farming more attractive and helping in retaining the younger population by providing another livelihood option; b) cooperation between farmers and other local actors by providing practical ways of improving land management practices and avoiding existing local conflict on the use of land, especially in relation with grazing; c) providing regulation and mitigation services through the higher expected degrees of annual plants diversity, which will increase soil cover and decrease evapotranspiration and erodibility, preserving thus soil and water resources; d) the overall carbon foorprint of the islands by reducing the dependency from imported feed; e) the transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources, promoting thus education and local awareness through pilot-demonstration projects that will show through practical implementation the benefits (environmental and economic) of conservation to local societies and therefore will make these societies more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future; f) the collaboration with the private sector, integrated crop-livestock systems as an opportunity to develop livestock-related business activities, facilitating access to finance, equipment and machinery; g) the control of desertification, enhanced soil carbon sequestration and related reduction of the existing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, use of cleaner water, protection from drought; h) the reduction of costs for inputs/technology acquisition, increased savings and increased food security and i) the restoration of natural wildlife habitat, improved economic viability for organic production and make biodiversity an important economical tool.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Progress made under this action shall be measured by cording and evaluating economic, social and mainly environmental impacts: Outputs: (a) Economic output of the project: (i) commitments and (ii) payments; (b) Physical output: (i) Areas, (ii) Number of beneficiaries, (iii) Amount of production Results: (a) Financial results: (i) Annual input â&#x20AC;&#x201C; output of the participants in â&#x201A;Ź, (ii)% change of the produced products (milk, meat, biomass); (b) Biodiversity: (i) Annual herbaceous biomass measurements in grazing land and "control " areas.

Impacts: (a) Economic sustainability:

107

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(i) Farm results and participants opinion; (b) Eco systemic processes - services: Estimation based on measurements of the diversity and the productivity.

A monitoring system should be developed to evaluate the results and the impacts to biodiversity and species conservation to clearly demonstrate the benefits at all levels of the action.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of the main expenditures of this action are estimated in relation with the personnel costs, the travel cost, the meeting and workshop cost, as well as with the cost of the practices which will be impemented (eligible for funding by this action), such as infrastructure costs, seed costs, farming supplies and inputs, promotion costs, and costs required to cover the installation of quality schemes.

108

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

C.2

Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, State of the Marine Environment recording, mapping, evaluation and practices

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HCMR Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: HCMR will be involved in the project by (a) The Department of Oceanography which has a large experience on marine biodiversity research; (b) The Department of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters which has a large experience in producing scientific knowledge that can be used for the management of living resources of fish and shellfish in the Greek Seas; (c) The Hydrobiological Station in Rhodes Island which focuses on field research concerning the resources of the sea and the sea bed Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action allows the proper implementation of demonstration projects. All relevant parameters will be studied in order to pave the path towards a sustainable management of the marine environment, including the recording and assessing of marine biodiversity, the impact of exotic species in endemic fish fauna, the analytical study of fishery resources for the improvement of their sustainable management and proposals for alternative professional activities of anglers (fishing tourism, creation and implementation of artificial reefs).

SUB-ACTIONS C.2.1. Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Based on the action A2 results, this action includes (a) the mapping of the seabed and its habitats of the marine area around the four islands and surrounding with emphasis on the identification of areas of interest for fisheries, areas requiring protection and also of specific marine ecosystems (Posidonia oceanica meadows) and of diving tourism areas and (b) the seafloor mapping with emphasis on the habitat types, which will be performed using a multibeam echo sounder and a side-scan sonar installed on HCMR’s S/V “Alcyone” while the resulting maps will be of high resolution. The following will be studied: The variety of landforms (geo-diversity) and their dynamics: Inland section as supplier of freshwater and sediments to the coast; Coastal landforms and the factors that configure them; Characteristics of the marine coastal zone; Human activities in the coastal zone.

109

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

The biodiversity of the coastal system: Hard substrate habitats of the infralittoral zone (photophilous macroalgae); Hard substrate habitats of the circalittoral zone (gorgonians, corals); Soft substrate habitats of the infralittoral zone (underwater meadows); Soft substrate habitats of the circalittoral zone (red calcareous algae formations).

The field work data will be transferred into maps and will be combined with existing information from aerial and satellite images, older maps etc. in order to facilitate the detailed study of the coastline’s evolution and the determination of the impacting factors. The field work and laboratory analysis will be performed by the scientific team that will use HSR’s and HCMR’s field and lab equipment, which will be upgraded if necessary.

Maps of Coastline & Coastal Habitat Types: The scientific team will document and photograph the geomorphologic characteristics of the coastline, but also its habitats. The exact location of the major coastal landforms will be recorded with a portable GPS. The field work data will be transferred into maps and will be combined with existing information from aerial and satellite images, older maps etc. in order to facilitate the detailed study of the coastline’s evolution and the determination of the impacting factors.

The field work and laboratory analysis will be performed by the scientific team that will use HSR’s and HCMR’s field and lab equipment, which will be upgraded if necessary.

Underwater Maps of the CZ (Multi-beam Bathymetry - Side Scan Imaging): The mapping of geomorphologic features and bathymetry of the seabed will cover the largest possible part of the underwater CZ. The HCMR’s S/V “Alcyone” will be used along with the existing lab and field equipment of HSR and HCMR, which will be upgraded and completed, if necessary. During the field work, the multi-beam echo sounding of the bottom will be carried out with the MBES RESON SeaBat7125.

This specific MBES operates at frequencies of 400 and 200 kHz (for the shallow and deeper water, respectively), and it is combined with inertial motion sensor Coda Octopus F185+ R and DGPS. The capability to receive corrections RTK (Real Time Kinematics), allows the determination of the position of the vessel with accuracy better than 0.50 meters.

Raw data of the acoustic investigation of the underwater area of the CZ will be processed in order to compile the bathymetric maps in different scales. Multi-beam data will also be used to compile side scan image maps or otherwise quality maps of seabed and habitats. The accuracy of these maps will be confirmed by sampling and / or scuba diving at selected points (ground-trouthing).

In the very shallow waters, the HCMR’s speedboat "Triton I" of HCMR will be used, which will be supplied by suitable equipment for bathymetric and acoustic investigation of the undersea bottom.

C.2.2. State of the Marine environment - Coastal fishery fleet, fishery practices, registration of the non-indigenous fishes.

This sub-action, aiming at providing measures and means of implementation to contribute halting overfishing and marine biodiversity loss, is based on information, data and assessment studies of the coastal and marine environment and of the fishery resources.

110

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

All relevant parameters and results will be assessed and evaluated in order to pave the path towards a sustainable management of the marine environment, including the recording and assessing of marine biodiversity, the study of the exotic species and their relationships with the endemic fish fauna and the comprehensive study of fish stocks and of the total fishing activity in the study area.

The coastal zone of the study area, the state of the marine environment and fisheries will be assessed and evaluated in order to obtain all relevant elements and determine the most important and fragile marine ecosystems, and some specific areas, which have to be protected, due to the high value of marine biodiversity, affected by coastal areas pressures, pollution and overfishing, depending on their specificities, based on previous studies. The determination of the main pressures on biodiversity on the study area will be done using the available data on rising temperature, change habitats, appearance of the invasive species, gelatinous species blooms both native and non-native.

The criteria of the evaluation will be based on the CBD Decision 9/20 In addition, proposals for alternative professional activities of anglers, such as fishing tourism as well as a project for the creation and implementation of artificial reefs will be developed.

The steps to follow in order to achieve expected results are: i.

Analytical study of the fishery resources;

ii. ii. Registration of specific catches and sensitive fishery grounds; iii. iii. Study of the socio-economic impact of invasive alien fishes, such as the tetrodotoxincontaining pufferfish Lagocephalus sceleratus, the rabbitfish Siganus rivulatus and Siganus luridus and the blue-spotted cornetfish Fistularia commersonii as well as other non-indigenous fish species; iv. Study of fishery practices and problems of fishermen; v. Recreational fishery in the study area.

Fishery database study of the marine fishery resources and stocks: i.

Analytical fishery study of fishery populations;

ii. Study regarding the alternative fishery grounds and new target species; iii. Collection of local fishery data (landings, biomass, biological data); iv. Recording and assessment of the fish stocks.

Socio-economical study of fishery: i.

Socio-economic analysis of the fishery activity;

ii. Assessment of the importance of fisheries in socio-economic cohesion of sensitive island regions; iii. Collection, elaboration and analysis of data from the local fishermen.

Assessment of the fisheries resources in the coastal waters of the marine area between the

111

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

islands in the E. Aegean Sea: Identification of the fishery resources, estimation of their abundance and biodiversity, their geographical and bathymetrical distribution in relation to size and sex, the structure of their population, the feeding strategies of the most commercial species, the estimation of coastal resources assemblages.

The samples will be collected from coastal fishing boats, in a seasonal basis, after close cooperation with coastal fishermen from each island. Since there is an urgent need to reduce the intense pressure and destructive power that modern fishing practices apply to the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s coastal fisheries, the development of deep water fisheries (>400 m) may be understood as a late stage of the "fishing up" process. In the study area the study of deep water resources, as the very commercial red shrimps (Aristaeomorpha foliacea, Aristeus antennaus) are exploiting by the Italian fishermen and there are not any official data concerning the dynamic population of their stocks or the biological, ecological aspects.

Four seasonal experimental surveys will be carried by the research vessel PHILIA, which belongs to HCMR. Extensive sampling system designed fisheries production data (total daily production of fishing vessels per tool, types of catches of each vessel, weight (Kg) each kind of the catch and the lengths of the major commercial species, the fishing area or any additional information deemed necessary for the implementation of the program). The sampling will have duration of 24 months, in a seasonal basis, and the data will come from small scale fishery boats, including all fishing gears.

C.2.3. Registration of coastal fishery fleet, and fishery practices and the State of the marine environment Analytical registration on the typology of coastal fishery fleet will be carried out. All the above data will be studied in order to promote a sustainable and responsible fishery in the study area. All the sensitive fishing areas presenting some peculiarities (spawning areas, recruitment areas) will be recorded in order to provide a special protection status.

A registration of the non-indigenous fishes will be done. Of particular interest is the case of Lagocephalus sceleratus which is listed among the 100 Invasive Alien Species in the Mediterranean Sea with profound social and ecological impacts due to the presence of tetrodotoxin, a source of food poisoning. The registration of fishing techniques in the area is of great importance, since this information in collaboration with the other gained knowledge will offer a valuable tool for the management of fishery resources.

The duration of this sub Action is 36 months Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) The situation of fish stocks caught in the study area is mainly unknown, as also fishery production, because the area has not been included in the European program MEDITS-GR or other program of study. Fishery production of medium and small-scale type of fishery is not analytically known. The collapse of scientific data is the main reason to not allow promoting fisheries management measures based on reliable and valid scientific data.

Determination of the quality and of threats to seabird foraging areas and a comprehensive and welldesigned management guideline based on scientific data is an essential tool for the effective management and conservation of seabird foraging grounds on Posidonia beds. Aiming to provide local

112

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

authorities with the necessary management tools the action intends, inter alia, to elaborate Plans of Integrated Coastal Zone Management. The mapping and the assessment of the seafloor with emphasis on the habitat types shall allow for their effective protection.

This action shall provide all necessary data in order to facilitate applying the fisheries management measures in both areas of research toghether with an assessment of the economic status of coastal fisheries in the local market and the cost of maintenance and possible replacement of fishing equipment. The proposals shall be based on the comparative assessment of the problems faced by fishermen in their work on both sides of the Aegean, taking into consideration the registration of all uses of coastal land in the two areas of research and their relationships with fisheries. Prioritizing the mapping and description of seagrass and Posidonia oceanica meadows and coralligenous formations is quite essential for the classification of impacts, threats and related conservation measures and consequently for drawing-up and implementing effective management guidelines and also, providing analytical biological and landings data of coastal fishery fleet and of the non-indigenous fishes.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Moreover, these isolated small islands of South Aegean, which are Natura 2000 sites, faced a radical decrease of the fishing product, due to the augmentation of sea mammal numbers (dolphins and monk seals) and of the lagocephalus fish, which deplete the fishermen’ catches and destroy their fishing gear, consequently increasing their expenses and diminishing their gains also causing serious problems to fishes’ diversity. Unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, while detecting local biodiversity, affect, at the same time, the local economy, society and the quality of life. The persistence of pollution, the climate change, the misuse of hunting or fishing privileges, and the direct or indirect introduction of non-native species into locals habitat, all threaten the island biodiversity.

Introducing sustainable fishing practices in this sensitive area is not very easy, as there are many conflicts concerning fishery and fishing. To this reason is possible to face, during the implementation of this action, different kind of barriers and difficulties, which will be managed: -

Stakeholder don’t accept the project: New, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed

-

Stakeholder don’t trust each other: The scientific project partners are independent and adopt a neutral position for a balanced discussion and participation

-

There is less participation: New, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed

-

The dissemination of the results has not reached the desired level: New, more effective, dissemination means will be selected by the consortium based on the projects‟ results

-

A partner is facing difficulties to organize scheduled workshops, conferences or training activities: Other partners will try to support the organization of the event by providing the necessary resources

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Knowing the condition of fishery, including also the problems faced by professionals, allowing better the assessment of the prevailed conditions and would then lead to the adoption of a more appropriate fisheries’ management policy.

113

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

In particular, for coastal fisheries which is one of the many activities taking place in the coastal zone, fisheries policy should be harmonized with all the different uses and ultimately be integrated into a holistic management model, which comes the synthetic view of both natural (biotic and abiotic) parameters of the ecosystem and the socio-economic activities that occur therein. All the data obtained from the project will be evaluated and can be used for an assessment of future management structures based on the ecosystem service approach. The establishment of marine protected areas non-fishing is shaping economic and social opportunities which could be applied to the study area that display limited fishing activity, providing also alternative activities, such as ecotourism, scientific research and advanced maritime education, diving, underwater photography, environmental education, etc. Many of these activities have important economic and social benefits, which could overwhelm the benefits of overfishing.

Other main results which will be obtained from this Action are: -

-

Adequate and scientifically sound datasets of the type, size distribution and quality of foraging sites, with special reference to Posidonia beds and datasets of the distribution and abundance of target species will be produced to allow for foraging ground quality assessment and preparation of the management guidelines.

Data on the typology, mainly of coastal fishery, on the fishery production, and socio-economic information.

The socio-economic study of fisheries and the fishing industry and the registration of land use.

Study of interaction with other activities taking place in the coastal ecosystem.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action shall deliver important data concerning coastal and marine biodiversity and fishery for an area with a high value ecosystem, focused on marine biodiversity and the situation of fish stocks caught in the study area which are mainly unknown. Taking into consideration that the proposed project actions have a demonstration character, an evaluation of the techniques and methods demonstrated will also be included guiding to the development of a monitoring and assessment scheme. Specific assessment will be done, to evaluate the socio-economic impact of the project actions on the local economy and population, as well as an assessment on the ecosystem functions restoration. Creation and organization of the necessary data will be provided in order to facilitate applying the necessary fisheries management measures in both areas of research, such as: (a) Assessment of the economic status of coastal fisheries through the catch value in the local market and the cost of maintenance and possible replacement of fishing equipment; (b) Comparative assessment of the problems faced by fishermen in their work; (c) Registration of all uses of coastal land in the two areas of research and their relationships with fisheries.

These assessments are included as separate preparatory actions, based on consolidating studies, data, and results over the project lifetime, which will be delivered with the Final Report.

Regular reporting on monitoring will also be produced concerning: -

Species number from the western to the eastern part of the Mediterranean and characteristics which are needed protection.

-

Data on the stocks of demersal and small pelagic species of commercial interest in the specific study area

-

Specific data and records on the South Aegean marine Angiosperms Posidonia oceanica, Cymodocea nodosa, angiosperms Zostera noltii and Halophila stipulacea.

114

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

-

Data on fishery production of medium and small-scale type of fishery

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The stuff effort has been estimated according the man months above all involved in analyses and elaborations. Another part of the budget is travel costs of the personnel in the study area taking into account the expenses for travel and daily allowances, personnel expenses, consumables. The funding of new equipment will be limited to set up dedicated instruments, consumables laboratory processing samples and vessel’s operative costs, travel. Other direct costs and new personnel in contract (4 PERSONS IN Action C2). A high cost is due to the rent of the fishing boats for the surveys in order to estimate the landings and to collect biological data of the fishery resources.

The ship time of PHILIA research vessel of HCMR (which can be used occasionally) has not be estimated. This ship could be used occasionally during the project - for 2 years - in order to assist the coastal boats from each area (2 boats from each island) which will collaborate with HCMR giving landings data and biological samples as also the estimation of the demersal resources and possible sites for the establishment of artificial reefs in a seasonal basis for 2 years. Eventual costs could be provided for 5 or 10 ship time during the project. The HCMR’s S/V “Alcyone” will be used for Seafloor Mapping of the CZ and sampling along with the existing lab and field equipment of HSR and HCMR, which will be upgraded and completed, if necessary. The total ship time of HCMR’s S/V “ALCYONE” is estimated to 30 days during the project.

In the very shallow waters, the HCMR’s speedboat "Triton I" of HCMR will be used, which will be supplied by suitable equipment for bathymetric and acoustic investigation of the undersea bottom. The indirect costs for each partner have been calculated according the policy of HCMR included in the consortium. The other direct cost considered are: consumable, survey materials, instruments, special publication volume of scientific works and workshops organization.

115

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

C.3

Marine biodiversity and sustainable fishery: Designation of Marine protected areas non-fishing and alternative professional activities Demonstration projects

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HCMR Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: HCMR will be involved in the project by (a) The Department of Oceanography which has a large experience on marine biodiversity research; (b) The Department of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters which has a large experience in producing scientific knowledge that can be used for the management of living resources of fish and shellfish in the Greek Seas; (c) The Hydrobiological Station in Rhodes Island which focuses on field research concerning the resources of the sea and the sea bed Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) In the frame of this action an evaluation of study area will be obtained in order to determine some specific areas as protected, depending on their specificities. This action is closely related to the action C2 and focuses at relating coastal and marine biodiversity with fishery in a co-management approach in order to provide: i.

Preferred marine ecosystems assessment

ii. Approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation in this situation iii. Investigation about creating static undersea installations (artificial reefs) iv. Development of the most suitable bio-economic models v. Demonstration projects to create protected areas from the fishery activities, fishery and sailing shelters On the base of all the data obtained from the project will be evaluated and can be used for an assessment of future management structures based on the ecosystem service approach, taking into consideration that the few existed data are not consistent and balanced for an assessment of an ecological administration of any marine protected area among the islands of the study area.

The principal sectors which will be elaborated are: i.

Definition and establishment of marine regions with a special status and protection management with revision of the boundaries of Natura 2000

ii. Selection of specific areas or islets as wildlife refuges in the study area iii. Select areas of high ecological value in need of protection iv. Creation of protected areas from fishery activities

116

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

v. Drafting a management plan of invasive alien species vi. Promotion of alternative management scenarios taking into account socio-economic, biological and fishery data vii. Developing a framework for the application of compensatory measures as provided for in Article 6 (4) of Directive 92/43/EEC viii. Impact study of management measures in local society Although several taxonomic papers have been published, many records are problematic since morphological descriptions and voucher material is limited. Aegean Sea is by far the better-investigated area of the Greek coasts. The demonstration projects to create protected areas, fisheries areas, fishery and sailing shelters may enhance differently ecosystems, protecting the environment and their bio communities from activities which might cause significant losses of biodiversity and changes in the interaction of species.

I. Marine protected areas i.

Definition and establishment of marine regions with a special status and protection management with revision of the boundaries of Natura 2000; Selection of: (a) specific areas or islets as wildlife refuges in the study area; (b) marine areas of high ecological value in need of protection; (c) marine areas of high biodiversity value in need of protection;

ii. Specification of protected marine areas for fisheries; iii. Specification of invasive alien species impact to biodiversity and fishery providing measures and guidelines in view to minimize threats; iv. Promotion of alternative management scenarios taking into account socio-economic, biological and fishery data v. Development of a framework for the application of compensatory measures as provided for in Article 6 (4) of Directive 92/43/EEC vi. Impact study of management measures in local society In the case that will prove that the fishery stocks are overfished or overexploited will suggest to the policy makers a reduction of the fishing effort and a different professional orientation and professional diversification, in line with CAP, could extremely be considered as necessary. To this end, the need for alternative activities of Greek fishermen has long been perceived, such as artificial reefs, the fishing tourism and different fishery grounds could consist a sufficient solution through demonstration projects to define: (a) Preferred marine ecosystems assessment having as scope to reduce the fishing effort, the mortality of non-target species within protected areas, such as by catch and discards from fishing species and species caught by illegal fishing gears; (b) Ecosystems conservation of protected areas by gear, and to increase the likelihood of such rare and vulnerable ecosystems, species and bio communities to be able to remain constant.

117

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(c) Approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation in this situation after the study of the alien species (d) Investigation about creating static undersea installations (artificial reefs) (e) Development of the most suitable bio-economic models in order to protect the marine biodiversity and the fishery resources II. Alternative professional activities - Demonstration project A. Investigation for establishment of construction of artificial reefs in the future The artificial reefs have various functions, such as increase of biodiversity, precaution from the fishing trawler, causing a reduction in mortality of fish eggs and early stages, build nests or havens for species that do not make large movements, attracting and fostering pelagic fishes shoals finding food on the reef, energy recycling with biomass production snapped on the reef and, finally, protection of the biocenosis. The artificial reefs can be man-made structures established in marine regions with the aim of strengthening the fisheries productivity. In the frame of this project a study will become in order to select the most appropriate location for future installation of an artificial reef. This place should cover the setup of some criteria which will be studied in detail (e.g., substrate type, depth, some physicochemical parameters and protection of some areas from overfishing). The data from the fishery study will aim to the estimation of the abundance of fish populations in some sub locations in the study area and could be used for the established of possible locations of artificial reefs in the future.

B. Development of diving and fishing tourism Aiming at reducing the fishing effort and thus a better conservation of fisheries and marine resources, it is important to diversify income sources within the professional fisheries sector, to augment the incomes of fishermen, associated to the differentiation of economic activities, lower fuel and vessel consumption and less working hours, and, possibly, the higher employment rates of young people and women. The diving and the fishing tourism consist a sufficient solution.

The main goals of applying fishing tourism activities in the area are: 

to promote the environmental, socio-cultural and economic values of the islands through the fishermen which represent them and to achieve a sustainable development of the areas



to recognize the leading role of professional fishermen in shaping coastal areas, and the added value given to local fisheries products and, in many cases, to traditional artisanal fisheries,



to develop environmental and cultural education activities



to develop innovative concept of tourism and attractive tourism offers

III. Information, education, training and consultation workshop on coastal and marine biodiversity and fishery sustainable practices to achieve commitments on a co-management of the natural environment with the fisheries The stakeholders involved in the frame of this project actions are the local fishermen (professional and recreational), competent local and regional authorities related to the management of fisheries resources or individuals engaged in the trade of fishery.

118

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

The project results will be disseminated to a large community of public, fishermen, policy and decision makers, stakeholders and many more. Dissemination will take place during the project to get feedback and input from external experts and to inform about the progress of the project activities and in the end of the project to provide end users with innovative scientific results.

Training and consultation workshop with local stakeholders will be organised in the four islands, as well as in the islands of Rhodos and Kos, during the project operational period and mainly during the preparatory period. Four meetings with local stakeholders per island (4x4=16) are necessary to inform, discuss and decide, after concrete participatory process, on basic project parameters.

Expected persons per island: 50 + 200 (Rhodos, Kos) Total: 400 persons.

The professional fishermen will provide their data concerning their landings, their effort and will collaborate with us to supply of biological samples in order to study the biology, ecology and population dynamics of fishery resources in the study area. In accordance to this, the socio and economic data of the fishery will be collected through questionnaires completed by them. In order to study the effects of recreational fishery on the professional one and the fishery resources, the close cooperation with the recreational fishermen will enrich our knowledge in order to gain the integrated fishery situation in the research area. The local and regional authorities supply us with data regarding the fleet and any other data concerning the fishery in the area. The data related to the trade and any possible processing of the catch will be collected by the most appropriate persons. Brochures, leaflets, publications, etc., specialised on Integrated Coastal Management and sustainable fishing will be provide, to be distributed. Films, documentaries and other information and dissemination material will be provided concerning the whole project objectives, actions, and results.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action responds directly to the objectives of the Directive 92/43/EEC with emphasis on the identification of areas of interest for fisheries, areas requiring protection and also of specific marine ecosystems (Posidonia oceanica meadows) and of diving tourism areas as well as to the habitat types included in the Habitat Directive and the EU Regulation for the Mediterranean Fisheries. On the base of the mapping and description of seagrass and Posidonia oceanica meadows and coralligenous formations this action contribute to provide an important classification of impacts, threats and related conservation measures and consequently for drawing-up and implementing effective management guidelines and designate specific sensitive areas which have to be restore and protect.

The study area is already included in the Greek Natura 2000 network but protection mesaures have not been undertaken yet. This action shalll provide valuable proposals for protected - non fishing - areas contributing to enforce the Habitat Directive 92/43/EEC, revising existing data and maps which have been produced 15 years ago and also the information from the 6 years reporting (according to the Article 17 of the Habitat Directive) has not been included.

This action is also necessary to support the implementation of the proposed demonstration projects for marine coastal habitats in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (mainly the priority habitat type 1120 “Posidonia meadows” and the habitat type 8330 “marine caves”, which is important habitat in the life cycle of the Mediterranean monk seal. Additionally, on the base of this action shall be developed and implemented a concrete monitoring of the marine coastal habitats with halting the loss of biodiversity. Finally introducing a co-management of the coastal annd Marine biodiversity and fishery a very useful tools shall be produced in order to guide the development of an Integrated Coastal Zone Management (F6) 119

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Possible constrains and assumptions: -

A partner is facing difficulties to organise scheduled workshops, conferences or training activities : Other partners will try to support the organisation of the event by providing the necessary resources

-

An expected deliverable is not delivered by the responsible partner: Other partners will try to assist so that there are no delays to the work plan. The Project Coordination committee will deal with specific problems

-

Dissemination of the results has not reached the desired level : New, more effective, dissemination means will be selected by the consortium based on the projectsâ&#x20AC;&#x; results

-

A partner desires to leave the consortium: The leaving partner will be substituted by another partner from the same country or another one with similar characteristics

-

A work package leader desires to leave his position: The position can be filled by another partner who has the necessary skills

-

Stakeholder donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t accept the project: New, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed

-

Stakeholder donâ&#x20AC;&#x;t trust each other: The scientific project partners are independent and adopt a neutral position for a balanced discussion and participation

-

There is less participation: New, more effective information about the project and the expected results will be developed

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action shall contribute at reducing overfishing and thus provide a better conservation of fisheries and marine resources. it is important to diversify income sources within the professional fisheries sector, to augment the incomes of fishermen, associated to the differentiation of economic activities, lower fuel and vessel consumption and less working hours, and, possibly, the higher employment rates of young people and women. The diving and the fishing tourism consist a sufficient solution.

The designation of specific marine protected areas could extent the marine Natura 2000 network and thus providing a good conservation status supporting also further assessment. The few existed data are not consistent and balanced for an assessment of an ecological administration of any marine protected area among the islands of the study area. These areas shall be managed and protected applying the most appropriate management and exploitation. After the established of these potential protected areas, the results will be communicated to the competent authorities in Environmental Management and to the general public in order to raise awareness and to respect more the local ecosystem.

The need for alternative activities of Greek fishermen has long been perceived. In the context of the reform of the common fisheries policy in our country, where the crisis in which stocks have fallen and it was decided that we should give weight to reduce fishing activity, the need for professional orientation and professional diversification is considered necessary. The artificial reefs and the fishing tourism consist a sufficient solution. Obviously, thus contribute at promoting the environmental, socio-cultural and economic values of the islands achieving a sustainable development of the areas recognizing the 120

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

leading role of professional fishermen in shaping coastal areas, and the added value given to local fisheries products and, in many cases, to traditional artisanal fisheries.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Fishery-specific sustainability indicators are necessary to assess and monitor the state of the sector and the performance of its governance, and to assess the degree of implementation of management measures. These indicators, which tend, in present use, to be limited to biological components of the fishery system (i.e., stock biomass (B) or fishing mortality (F)), are an operational tool for providing advice to fisheries management. Changes in indicators over time, however, cannot be meaningfully interpreted in relation to sustainable development without considering them in relation to a reference value corresponding to sectorial or societal objectives (or targets) and ecosystem constraints (or limits).

In order to assess the exploitation of coastal and demersal stocks in the study areas and the designing of a stocks management will need to collect firstly biological data and, simultaneously, landings data in order to use the creation and application of management models. At the same time the collection of the socio-economic study of fishery will contribute to this creation mentioned above. Finally we will propose alternative uses of fishing activities in the area (fishing tourism, study of the possible establishment of artificial reefs).

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The stuff effort has been estimated according the man months above all involved in analyses and elaborations. Another part of the budget is travel costs of the personnel in the study area taking into account the expenses for travel and daily allowances, personnel expenses, consumables. The funding of new equipment will be limited to set up dedicated instruments, consumables laboratory processing samples and vesselâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operative costs, travel. Other direct costs and new personnel in contract (4 PERSONS IN Action 2). A high cost is due to the rent of the fishing boats for the surveys in order to estimate the landings and to collect biological data of the fishery resources.

121

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

C.4

Conservation and Enhancement of the Coastal Biodiversity and natural flood prevention by Demonstration Project on a small wetland and sand dunes system on the Island of Tilos.

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: Universitty of the Aegean - Department of Marine Sciences, in collaboration with Tilos Park Association (Coordinating Beneficiary) and the Citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Inspectorate for Sustainable Development - CISD Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action aims at the study, protection and conservation of the Coastal Biodiversity promoting actions in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (dir. 92/43 EEC) and as natural flood prevention and natural formations, implementing concrete demonstration projects for small coastal wetlands and sand dunes monitoring the relation of small wetland and Dune with halting the loss of biodiversity and climate change.

Protection and conservation measures of the wetland and sand dunes are necessary, not only because of coastal wetlands and sand dunes important biodiversity but also because of sand dunes importance as natural mechanisms of flood control against sea level rise. These measures will provide information on conservation needs assessment to guide a specific management plan, including restoration actions (if needed), which could be readily associated with ecotourism activities and environmental education programmes that will enhance public awareness and add value to the area.

On the base of the results of the preparatory action A3 concrete protection/conservation/Restoration measures and actions shall be elaborated, for the coastal Biodiversity via demonstration actions concerning small coastal wetlands and sand dunes system situated on the island of Tilos.

In the same time, the action takes into consideration the dynamics and assess the impacts of the ephemeral riverine sediment supply at the coastal drainage basins of Tilos, as a case study area, providing:

SUB-ACTIONS C.4.1. Registration of the coastal zone and the potential of flood and erosion of the small wetland and the sand dunes (both onshore and inshore), including the surficial distribution of the inshore habitats;

122

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

i.

Exploration of the dynamics of flood and drought phenomena of small island drainage basins and their impact on sediment budget of the coastal zone;

ii.

Detailed mapping;

iii.

Assessment and control of the potential of flood and erosion of the small wetland and the sand dunes to realise the value of their conservation and restoration, in collaborate with local authorities;

iv. Installation permanently of a weather station in Tilos and train local students and municipal employees on (a) periodic retrieval of the weather station data, (b) data analysis, (c) constant beach profile measurements (d) the use of a database for beach retreat projections, especially after stormy events.

I. Clean up actions from trash and debris i. Eradication of invasive species. ii. Designation/mapping of the wetland and sand dunes; iii. Fencing of the protected areas (wooden fence from chestnut tree wood); Pollution control of possible sources/restoration actions where needed.

II. Synthesis of the Action Results The results of the abovementioned phases will be gathered in order the final results of the action to be derived.

The outputs of the action will be: i. A thorough study of biodiversity and physical characteristics of the small wetland and sand dunes on the island of Tilos and their multiple values as tourist attraction, environmental education and climate change mitigation. ii. Development/evaluation of a rapid technique to create a database of the spatial (and –where available- other geo-environmental) characteristics of the four island beaches (Chalki, Nisyros, Simi, Tilos), using widely-available, web-based information; this database could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g.

Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive)). Also, a geo-spatial web-GIS flood forecasting support system will be developed as the primary means of the relevant hazard identification. iii. Predictions of ranges of beach retreats for different long- and short-term sea level rise scenarios and differential hydrodynamic, morphological, and sedimentological beach characteristics; this will be done on the basis of the application of suitable ensembles of existing parametric and numerical morphodynamic models. This technique will provide a prognostic coastal management tool, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools. iv. Comparison/calibration of coastline positions obtained from the web-based information with ‘ground truth’ data (from the RTK-GPS, bathymetric and morphological surveys). v. Study of the dynamics of the sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins on the basis of 123

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

hydrological modeling and field observations with particular emphasis on extreme events. It is envisaged that this work will assist in the development of improved scientific approaches to monitor/model sediment loads and yields and assess water/sediment discharges of the small island drainage basins. It is envisaged that this study will also be very useful in the implementation of relevant EC legislation (e.g. Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive).

C.4.2. Hydrological and Beach Modelling and Vulnerability Assessment to simulate long- and short-term beach retreats due to mean sea level changes and storm surges, respectively.

Beach retreat (erosion) due to sea level changes is assessed mostly through the development/application of parametric/analytical and/or process-response models (e.g. Van Rijn et al.

2003). The main advantage of the former is their simplicity; however, such models cannot resolve beach changes due to high frequency events, in contrast to the more complex process-response models that are based on the coupling of hydrodynamic and sediment dynamic numerical modules.

In the present action, 3 cross-shore (1-D) parametric/analytical models[1] and 3 cross-shore processresponse (numerical) morphodynamic models[2] have been used to form suitable model ensembles to simulate long- and short-term beach retreats due to mean sea level changes and storm surges, respectively.

This approach is based on the concept that since different models have differential sensitivity to the controlling factors, their common (ensemble) application may provide more balanced predictions. The Bruun (1988) model is a widely used model[3]. The Edelman (1972) model can deal with natural crossshore profiles and with larger and temporally variable sea level changes. The cross-shore profile is assumed that maintains its basic shape under a rising sea level. The Dean (1991) model assigns a greater significance on wave hydrodynamics than the previous models. SBEACH is a widely-used ‘bottom-up’ morphodynamic model[4] consisting of combined hydrodynamic, sediment transport and morphological development modules.

The numerical model based on the Leont’yev (1996) algorithms uses the energetic approach. Xbeach has been designed to simulate coastal evolution mainly due to temporally variable storm conditions (e.g.

Vousdoukas et al. 2011). The model accounts for short wave propagation and non-stationary shallow water processes. Three sea level rise scenarios will be mainly used, i.e. the low and high IPCC (2013) ranges (0.26 and 0.82 m, respectively) and a ‘doom’ scenario (the 1.86 m rise of Mori at al. (2013)).

Environmental data and land use analysis results will be also used in the modelling of the evolution of the water and sediment discharge of the small drainage basins using SWAT (Sediment and Water Assessment Tool), in order to assess the flood and erosion dynamics and impacts on the coastal sedimentary diet, together with coastal morphodynamics changes.

This model will be run for different land uses as well as different climatic forcing (climate change scenarios i.e. KNMI-RACMO2 from the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, United Kingdom Transient Run (UKTR) scenarios) in order to predict the sediment diet and its dynamics. A sensitivity analysis will be performed to define the parameters affecting model performance as well as the sediment transport processes. Also, a Geo-spatial web-GIS flood forecasting support system will be developed so as to integrate all the environmental information and SWAT model optimization into a user-friendly self-explanatory online GIS tool.

The main steps in the development of the flood risk assessment tool using a GIS-based framework will

124

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

be to collate, correlate and integrate data on a. spatial and temporal patterns of water rainfall and river flow b. spatial and temporal patterns of erosion dynamics c. SWAT model results d. operational flood forecast using a webGIS portal and e. the risk to flood prone areas f. the risk to coastal vulnerability based on the degree to which erosion dynamic factors have a statistically demonstrable impact on coastal sediment budget.

Each of these categories of data will require separate GIS processing and analysis, depending on the nature of the data and on the pre-existence (or otherwise) of spatial data in a suitable digital format. A Monitoring and assessment system will be pprovided (see action D.4) Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is necessary in order to study, assess and highlight the coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems biodiversity while reducing the potential erosion of the beaches. The implementation of the demonstration projects in the island of Tilos (Livadia, Eristos and Skafi), which have a high natural and ecological value, are very usefull in order to evaluate the range of potential retreat of these beaches under different scenaria of short- and long-term sea level rise through the use of suitable ensembles of parametric and numerical morphodynamic models, which could also be valuable for the islands beaches involved in the project, using readily available (web-based) remote sensing information.

In the same time, the action takes into consideration the dynamics and assess the impacts of the ephemeral riverine sediment supply at the coastal drainage basins of Tilos, as a case study area. It is important to underline the lack of studies concerning the biodiversity and the physical characteristics of the small coastal wetlands and sand dunes on the island of Tilos and their multiple values, which could constitute important tourist attraction providing environmental education and climate change mitigation.

Assess the accuracy/sensitivity of remote-sensed images that provide information on beach spatial characteristics (e.g. beach width), through specifically targeted and detailed ground truth experiments in Tilos as well as detailed mapping of the coastal zone (both onshore and inshore) including the surficial distribution of the inshore habitats.

On the other hand, the action results shall provide a database of the spatial (and â&#x20AC;&#x201C;where availableother geo-environmental) characteristics of the four island beaches (Nisyros, Tilos, Symi, Chalki), which could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g. Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive)).

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The lack of coastal data base as well as of methodologies/tools to assess the vulnerability of coastal systems to sea level rise/extreme events is an importan constraint. These tools face several limitations in respect of their coastal retreat/inundation forecasts (due to e.g. lack of coastal Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) with appropriate accuracy resolution and of other necessary input parameters such as coastal hydrodynamic information. However, this action shall allow the development of reliable data

125

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

base using satellite images combined with in situ investigations in Tilos for the mapping (and correlation) of the spatial characteristics of the islands beaches, together with other attributes such as geology/topography, sediment texture, the presence of coastal works and other coastal infrastructure and accessibility. Topographic/bathymetric information (crossshore profiles and shoreline positions) across beach sections will be obtained from overlapping topographic and bathymetric data, which will be collected using a TopCon RTK DGPS and a Hi-Target HD370 hydrographic echosounder.

The onshore (inner) beach boundaries of the profiles will set as the seaward margins of either vegetated dunes and coastal cliffs or artificial structures whereas bathymetric information will be collected to an appropriate distance and depth for the correct use during modeling. Sediment samples will also be collected from each topographic section; these will be analysed to estimate grain size distributions/parameters (Mz, Md, Sk and Ď&#x192;) that are used to classify beach sediments. The inshore morphological survey will be carried out using a high-resolution side scan sonar for shallow waters (< 20 m depth), so as to achieve mapping of the shallow water habitats. The wave regime will be abstracted from the Wind and Wave Atlas of the Hellenic Seas (Soukissian et al. 2007) and the annual wave heights and periods for intense storm conditions (frequency of occurrence < 1%) will be studied.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action will significantly enhance the knowledge in beach processes and morphodynamic modeling, the monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc.

Moreover, it will benefit to the Administration, national, regional and local and stakeholders.

The creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches shall permit a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox. In addition, it could also assist in enhancing the sustainable development prospects of coastal communities and ecosystems in the longer term. The results of this action will be benefit from the application of multidisciplinary research approaches/techniques. The development of a database of the spatial and other geo-environmental characteristics of the four island beaches shall provide widelyavailable, web-based information and could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant EU legal obligations.

The predictions of ranges of beach retreats for different long- and short-term sea level rise scenarios and differential hydrodynamic, morphological, and sedimentological beach characteristics will provide a prognostic coastal management tool, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question.

The study of the dynamics of the sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins on the basis of hydrological modeling and field observations with particular emphasis on extreme events could assist in the development of improved scientific approaches to monitor/model sediment loads and yields and assess water/sediment discharges of the small island drainage basins.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Beach retreat (erosion) due to sea level changes is assessed mostly through the development/application of parametric/analytical and/or process-response models. The main advantage of the former is their simplicity; however, such models cannot resolve beach changes due to high frequency events, in contrast to the more complex process-response models that are based on the 126

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

coupling of hydrodynamic and sediment dynamic numerical modules. In the present study, 3 crossshore (1-D) parametric/analytical models and 3 cross-shore process-response (numerical) morphodynamic models shall be used to form suitable model ensembles to simulate long- and shortterm beach retreats due to mean sea level changes and storm surges, respectively.

This approach is based on the concept that since different models have differential sensitivity to the controlling factors, their common (ensemble) application may provide more balanced predictions.

The Bruun (1988) model is a widely used model (i.e. Ranasinghe et al. 2013). The Edelman (1972) model can deal with natural cross-shore profiles and with larger and temporally variable sea level changes. The cross-shore profile is assumed that maintains its basic shape under a rising sea level.

The Dean (1991) model assigns a greater significance on wave hydrodynamics than the previous models. SBEACH is a widely-used ‘bottom-up’ morphodynamic model consisting of combined hydrodynamic, sediment transport and morphological development modules. The numerical model based on the Leont’yev (1996) algorithms uses the energetic approach. Xbeach has been designed to simulate coastal evolution mainly due to temporally variable storm conditions. The model accounts for short wave propagation and non-stationary shallow water processes. Three sea level rise scenarios will be mainly used and a ‘doom’ scenario.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

APPROXIMATE COST (€) is estimated in relation with the studies and deliverables (Beach Environmental Database / Pilot Beach Experiments / Beach Modelling and Vulnerability Assessment / Synthesis of the Project Results, Dissemination and Training) resulting from: - the peronnel costs (3 academic, 5-6 external collaborators and 3 CISD personnel) - travel expenses (including congresses, international collaborations etc.)

- equipment/Hardware/Software - consumables and Stationery - infrastructure costs Other costs are related with: (a) the "Clean up" action of a small wetland from trash and debris; (b) the eradication of invasive species action; (c) the fencing and designation of the wetland (wooden fence from chestnut tree wood); (d) 3 signposts with information about the wetland which should be constructed; (e) the payment of the necessary sampling for the pollution control of possible sources'(f) about 2,000 Leaflets/flyers which will be produced with visitor info and photos edited in Greek and English.

127

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

C.5

Biodiversity-based Tourism Product Development: Integrated Biodiversity, Rural, Coastal, Marine and Community-based tourism

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The University of Aegean participles in this proposal by the Department of the Environment / Laboratory of Local and Island Development in collaboration with the Citizen's Inspectorate for Sustainable Development (CISD) Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Responding to a critical question ÂŤCan tourism help biodiversity?Âť, together with local and indigenous communities, whose lives and culture are linked with it, this action aims at proving that the tourism sector and its operations have been beneficial to supporting, nurturing and enhancing biodiversity. To this end a community-based tourism (CBT) activities network shall be provided, where the main touristic attraction will be the experience of the traditional way of life and the of the high natural and geological ecosystems quality and value, connecting traditional tourism with ecotourism, gastronomic tourism and the quality products, spa tourism and diving tourism.

This action aiming at promoting sustainable tourism practices shall contribute to minimize negative impacts to biodiversity and protected areas, support traditional occupations and products, while minimize the mass Tourism system ensuring parallel operation of the local tourist market.

As tourism products are considered a comprehensive interpretation of flora and fauna, of nature evolution, of landscape features and cultural values of local communities, it is very challenged to develop new opportunities for tourists to get themselves involved while assisting communities economic and social development. In order to stimulate visitors flows and environmental marketing it is necessary to record, assess and study important attractions-tourism resources associated with tourism in nature adopting sustainable tourism practices optimizing the environmental impact of tourism industry and ensuring high quality of product and services.

The action targets directly specific habitats/species (land and marine) and aims at assessing the state of biodiversity, the potential of local products and services, the development of sustainable practices of tourism industry, the quality and quantity of agricultural, pastoral and fisheries products and other developing possibilities for new local product taking advantage of other elements and relevant data. The evaluation of the existing tourism potential in order to develop new tourism products, performance and process-based, in line with the project vision and goals, shall be based on the assessment of the baseline information and of the collected data on each target group (tourism activities, market and tools used by the mass consumer having a full control on the daily tourist consumption).

This action is based on information and data obtained by the relative preparatory action A.4, but also by

128

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

preparatory actions A1, A3 and the concrete actions C1, C2, C3, C4. The steps in order to prepare the demonstration projects implementation are:

SUB-ACTIONS C.5.1. Provide accessibility investigating green infrastructures An operating system and software shall be developed, which will be available on line, in order to monitor the sales and the after sales during tourist stay and the follow up actions (internet or collaborating tourist offices) as well as other products and services comparable to those offered in a mass tourism hotel, made with customized options (i.e. breakfast in traditional pastry shop or cafeteria, lunch at Chop House or tavern, dinner in gourmet restaurant, refreshments and drinks in beach bars and restaurants, rent of bicycles, motorcycles, cars, yachts, daily excursions, etc.).

A Data Base shall be produced which concerns the development of a networking system of permanent and mutual communication of protected areas administrations with all key stakeholders and business.

The creation of «green» tourism infrastructure will be provided as well as information spots (kiosk, informational signs, etc.) which will be placed along the paths and the sites of ecological, geological and paleontological interest for the information and the promotion of the touristic and other products are addressed to the four tourism destination islands and to the embarkation islands of Rhodes and Kos. This infrastructure shall be applied in each of the above mentioned islands, via existing or new established associations, tour operator and other business support.

C.5.2. A «Principles framework» for a Southern Aegean "Quality" Tourism shall be developed concerning improved efficiency/quality product and services of businesses involved in the provision of tourist services in the Southern Aegean Region.

Agreements on a «Responsible Tourism Declaration» made with affiliated local authorities and businesses shall provide commitments for promoting Southern Aegean "Quality" Tourism through their programs and their websites, highlighting sustainable tourism practices requirements and for contributing to strengthen partnership between regional and local authorities, tourist agencies and tour operators, etc.

Quality Certificates on «Business – Based Biodiversity Good Practices» shall be developed which will be issued by the Region of South Aegean aiming at rewarding tourism companies, agencies, hotels, tour operators and other tourism operators which shall be conform with the ecotourism criteria (elaboration and signing process) The elaboration and implementation of an eco-tourism network of projects and activities shall encourage the sensitization of the local population/visitors in the values of the natural and the cultural environment and shall attract new more sensitive tourists and visitors contributing to boost the local economy. These activities shall be related with the islands biodiversity and tradition, such as bird watching, local flora discovering, hiking, diving, geological and archaeological walks, etc.

A mild and environmentally friendly and operational tourism system shall be developed in order to provide coordination and good function of the eco-tourism network

129

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

C.5.3. Implementation of thematic demonstration projects Demonstration projects shall be developed in each island based on the adapted management approaches, combing the responsible use of ecosystems with adequate protection together with sustainable tourism, in line with the European Charter of the for Sustainable Tourism experience to ensure their sustainability in the future. This action will start at least one year after preparatory actions have been accomplished.

Specific demonstration projects shall be implemented in each island.

More particular the following actions and projects shall be provided: A. Implementation of an eco-tourism network providing concrete information, network maps, specialized documentation, and tourist guides and relative signalisation in order to facilitate the accessibility in the designated particular areas.

B. Mapping designated Biodiversity «Paths» linking important protected areas with other tourists attraction points which shall include the four islands.

In this context demonstration projects shall be developed and implemented in the islands of Tilos and Nisyros such as: i.

Maintenance, restoration and conservation of the existing paths in Tilos Island including the visit of Tilos Natura 2000 site, the coastal wetlands and sand dunes and the existing «Bird Observatory».

ii.

Creation of a thermal – SPA and geological «Paths» in the island of Nisyros (geological thermal park) linking the volcanic geology, the hot springs, the volcano and underwater volcanoes with landscape and the biodiversity aspects providing specific signaling, scientific documentation, thermal and geological maps, tourist guides, etc

iii.

Provision of a «Paths» network to link the marine, diving and fishing tourism (in line with the actions C2 and C3 provisions) with agro tourism and biodiversity, implementing in the islands of Chalki and Symi.

C. Elaboration of guidelines on sustainable tourism practices.

D. A Strategic Responsible Tourism Action Plan In order to consolidate the results and ensure further implementation this action shall provide a Strategic Responsible Tourism Action Plan, which will be based on a wide participatory procedure and will further developed under the After LIFE Plan (action F2).

The realisation of this objective shall be carried out under the key consolidated action concerning the elaboration of «Small Islands Biodiversity Strategy and sectoral Action Plans for South Aegean Small Islands through Participatory Planning, Environmental Governance and Public Participation» comporting inventories, management plans, thematic actions plans, monitoring schemes, management guides, stakeholder communication, governance, etc. which will be developed as independent action presented en detail as a separated action.

E.

Monitoring scheme The development of a monitoring scheme shall contribute to assess the progress made by survey of tourists satisfaction and behavior, sample/process/quality control instruments/business research

130

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(features and operating results), sample/process/quality control instruments/data processing results, etc.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) The action is necessary because of its contribution both to halt the loss of biodiversity and to restore, protect and highlight activities in the nature. Consequently, cumulative results will be referred not only for the emergence of high ecological value of the ecosystems of the islands but also to strengthen local entrepreneurship, such as: -

Strengthening the protected area network and encouraging the role of protected areas as key locations for good practices in the management of sustainable tourism and biodiversity, taking into account the full range of protected area categories;

-

Highlighting the south Aegean small islands comparative advantages in connection with the supply of locally quality produced agricultural and livestock products and with their sale in the structures of the ecotourism.

Ensuring a high quality of natural environment in a high holiday destination is an increasingly important success factor for most - if not all - types of tourism. Coasts, mountains, rivers, forests and wildlife are major attractions for tourists and every destination relies on natural resources and their related ecosystem services, as the demand for sustainable tourism products is growing.

Based the tourism product on biodiversity and ecosystem services values is easier to address sustainable tourism practices and to attract ecologically aware tourists, maximising the positive benefits of tourism to biodiversity, ecosystems and to local economies and social development.

The proposed environmentally friendly and operational tourism system together with the «Principles framework» for a Southern Aegean "Quality" Tourism, the agreements on a «Responsible Tourism Declaration», the issue of Quality Certificates on «Business–Based Biodiversity Good Practices», the elaboration and implementation of an eco-tourism network of projects and activities and the demonstration projects of pathway network shall contribute to change unsustainable tourism patterns.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Constraints are due to the impacts of tourism in relation to the environment and biological diversity which include: i.

Use of land and resources for accommodation, tourism facilities and other infrastructure provision, including road networks, airports and seaports;

ii.

Damage to or destruction of ecosystems and habitats, including deforestation, draining of wetlands, and intensified or unsustainable use of land;

iii.

Increased risk of erosion;

iv. Disturbance of wild species, disrupting normal behaviour and potentially affecting mortality and reproductive success; v.

Alterations to habitats and ecosystems;

vi. Increased risk of fires;

131

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

vii. Unsustainable consumption of flora and fauna by tourists (e.g., through picking of plants; or purchase of souvenirs manufactured from wildlife, in particular such endangered species as corals and turtle shells; or through unregulated hunting, shooting and fishing); viii. Increased risk of introduction of alien species; ix. Intensive water demand from tourism; Probably difficulties in timetable might been appear. The effort to involve different social groups in such a difficult project may cause delays or disagreements. Extensive discussions with all parties involved, can resolve many issues.

Also all parties will be bound by a contract of good cooperation and commitment to public participation.

Measures have to be taken to ensure that indigenous and local communities involved in, or affected by tourism, have the opportunity to participate from the start in discussions and workshop and also in monitoring and evaluation.

If the information provided is not sufficient, then further measures shall be provided. In the case that other stakeholders, including biodiversity managers and indigenous and local communities that may be affected by a proposed development, it will be necessary to discuss in depth and suplementaries provisions shall be taken ensuring that any opinion are taken into account by decision-makers.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Promoting sustainable tourism or ecotourism process should generated economic benefits for host communities, organizations and authorities managing natural areas with conservation purposes and providing alternative employment and income opportunities for islands local communities.

Sharing various types of benefits of the integration of nature, biodiversity, rural, coastal and marine concerns with local communities it will be produced an significant added value, not only for biodiversity protection but also for new job creation, fostering local enterprises, participation in tourism enterprises and projects, education, direct investment opportunities, economic linkages and ecological services, using appropriate mechanisms to be established/evolved to capture the benefits.

The vision, the objectives and the concrete actions provided by this project action form the basis of the implementation of a "Quality «tourism product in close relation with biodiversity and its services. It is a process that could be easily be undertaken by other islands local authorities achieving common vision and goals. On the other hand, sustainable tourism approaches will contribute to reduce pollution, contamination and environmental degradation from coastal tourism demonstrated in the South Aegean Small Islands context.

The medium-long term proposals will also contribute to make more competitive South Aegean tourism based on sustainable practices. The implementation of eco-tourism and biodiversity paths network, the demonstration projects and the specific activities will strengthen the link between the biodiversity and the tourism market.

Signing «Responsible Tourism Declaration» and attributing Quality Certificates on «Business – Based Biodiversity Good Practices» tourism operators, stakeholders and local authorities will be able to enforce synergies in view of joining new initiatives while reinforcing the role of biodiversity and natural ecosystems for sustainable tourism development.

132

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) A monitoring system will develop to assess the progress achieved on the biodiversity and the tourism activities management in relation to the tourism impact, taking into account the timescale for ecosystem changes. This will provide a means for detecting adverse effects that may arise from tourism activities and development, so that action can be taken to control and mitigate such effects.

Developers and operators of tourism facilities and activities will be required to report periodically to designated authorities and to the public on compliance with conditions set out in approvals, and on the condition of biodiversity and the environment in relation to the tourism facilities and activities for which they are responsible. Prior to the commencement of any new tourism development or activities, an inclusive monitoring and reporting system should be put in place, with indicators to track how tourism actions are mitigating threats to biodiversity, along with agreed upon quantifiable standards indicating thresholds of acceptable change. These should be developed in conjunction with all key stakeholders including indigenous and local communities. Indicators to cover aspects of management of biodiversity and sustainable tourism, including socio-economic and cultural aspects, will also be identified and monitored at regional and local level.

Monitoring and surveillance includes, inter alia, the impact of tourism activities on biodiversity, ecosystems and on the surrounding population; the general tourism activities and trends, including tour operations, tourism facilities, and tourist flows in originating and receiving countries, including progress towards sustainable tourism; the generation of income and employment; the proportion of tourism income retained in the local community; the multi-stakeholder processes effectiveness; the contribution of tourism to the well-being of the local population; the visitor impacts and visitor satisfaction, etc.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The indirect costs for the contribution of the partner have been calculated according the policy of the University of the Aegean - Research Unit which will be included in Grand Agreement. The other direct costs have been estimated for the personnel costs, the infrastructure costs, the consumable, the survey materials, instruments, the special publication volume of scientific works and workshops organization, the maps and tourist guides, the equipment, etc. Costs are also estimated for the demonstration projects in Tilos and Nisyros.

133

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

D. Monitoring of the impact of the project actions

134

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

D.1 Monitoring of the impact of the project actions

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: TPA will be assisted by the Project Manager (CISD) as coordinator while other beneficiaries will be implicated, such as UAegean and HCMR which will be responsibles for the scientific support.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Evaluating the effectiveness of the implemented Project actions and management strategies is very important in determining how management actions are affecting the ecosystem indicators. This final step involves monitoring and assessing data to see how well the concrete actions and the management strategies chosen are performing relative to the initial objectives stated. The use of simulation models or multi-stakeholder groups can help to assess management.

This action has to consider the contribution that valuing ecosystem services can make in demonstrating the value of biodiversity. To this end, it will take into consideration the results issued by the project actions in the frame of monitoring concerning: 1. The evaluation and assessment of the impact of agricultural and pastoral environmental management plan on biodiversity conservation issued by outputs and impacts of the actions A1, C.1 2. The impact of marine biodiversity and overfishing control as compared to the initial situation, objectives and expected results (actions A2, C2, C3) 3. The hydrological and Beach Modelling and Vulnerability Assessment based on the assessment of beach retreat (erosion) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the hydrological and beach modelling and the flood risk assessment tool (Actions A3, C4) 4. The assessment of the tourism impact on a valuable natural territory and of the impact of the potential benefits of tourism (Actions A4, C5).

The final results will be used to produce a framework that will give guidance on the effectiveness of alternative arguments and protection strategies in various contexts.

However, as the Project itself presents an integrated approach focused on an ecosystem-base management it is necessary to recognize the full array of interactions within the ecosystem, including humans, rather than considering single issues, species, or ecosystem services in isolation. But, due to the existing constraints in data availability for assessing ecosystem status and reflecting on the changes occurring in the time frame in which to operate it is not always easy to implement an ecosystem-based management, except the case of the marine where realm has developed in response to increasing recognition of the declining state of fisheries and ocean ecosystems.

135

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Anyway, a monitoring scheme of the projects results is essential in several ways: i. It guides management action by providing data on threats/impacts from human interactions or changing environmental conditions. ii. It is essential to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation management and interventions. iii. It is necessary to report on the status of particular species and ecosystems Establish monitoring protocols and regimes Just as effective conservation can ultimately only be defined in terms of impacts on the actual components of biodiversity on which interventions are focused, so the effectiveness of management can only be assessed by monitoring those components of biodiversity. Establishment of protocols and regimes for this should be an integral part of all conservation interventions. Because of the complexity of most biodiversity issues, innovative approaches may have to be developed.

These may include involvement of local people in surveys and monitoring (so-called “citizen science”), training of parataxonomists and use a range of remote-sensing techniques. While the importance of monitoring cannot be over-emphasized, it is equally important that the protocols established should not be unrealistically complicated or expensive to implement. Long-term continuity is the most important aspect of any monitoring regime, and this should be the prime consideration in its initial design.

In this context it is also important to specify topics that are vital for conservation policies, but they demand an important cost, which is not yet calculated due to the lack of systematic information, such as the costs estimated for: a. The farmland biodiversity monitoring b. The coastal, marine and fishery biodiversity monitoring c. The tourism impact biodiversity monitoring These costs could be dramatically cut if volunteer ‘citizen scientists’ fishers or farmers help gather data for the programmes. Monitoring programmes have been shown to make biodiversity policies more effective and it is necessary to be used in the frame of this action. Unsurprisingly, labour was the most expensive part of the programmes, and its cost varies widely across Europe. However, the costs could be reduced by up to 46% if farmers, livestock keepers, fisherman and tourism agents themselves did the fieldwork, and by up to 77% if volunteers are recruited, as part of citizen science initiatives, for fieldwork and lab tasks, such as identification of species. Viewed another way, if the total monitoring budget is fixed, 46% more monitoring could be done with farmers involved, and 77% more with citizen scientists.

Analyzing the way biodiversity and ecosystem services are treated in the context of this Project, in line with Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) principles, the following questions are to be addressed: 1) do the strategic assessments propose monitoring programs for biodiversity; 2) are ecosystem services considered, together with their links to human well-being?

3) is biodiversity considered in SEA as a strategic benefit?

4) how are these programs linked to future or on-going projects and EIA?

136

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

This task will be performed along four steps: First, it will be necessary to develop and establish the regular use of standard biological, physical and socio-economic monitoring protocols to ensure data compatibility and a regional picture of the state and use of natural resources. An assessment of existing status and change in the condition of biodiversity has to be measured against a set of criteria and indicators.

Second, a survey will conducted in order to assess the type of post-decision biodiversity monitoring programs determined.

Third, is the analysis of the monitoring reports of the Project actions for the coordination and the development of the After LIFE Plan.

Fourth step, it consists of a set of interviews with practitioners, both from environmental assessment firms, from the administration, the Institutions for the Conservation of Nature and Biodiversity and the relevant stakeholders.

The information obtained through interviews will be used to complement results of the survey and also to improve the general understanding of the reasons behind the possible gaps found in the treatment of biodiversity.

Results from this task will be summarized and published in a paper presenting a critical evaluation, of monitoring programs and mitigation measures regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services, included in environmental impact assessments. Finally one workshop with scientists and experts will be organized, which will have the goal to promote better integration of SEA and EIA relatively to the monitoring of biodiversity. A handbook of good practices will be published as the result of this workshop as well as a summary paper. The framework will be made accessible through a web-based public access database with associated toolkit. To ensure practical usability, the toolkit and database interface will be developed in cooperation with stakeholders.

Key elements that are considered by the Project Acknowledging Connections, including the linkages between land, coastal, marine ecosystems and human societies, economies and institutional systems, as well as those among various species within an ecosystem gathering interconnected factors which affect it.

Cumulative impacts on how individual actions affect the ecosystem services that flow from coupled social-ecological systems in an integrated fashion, rather than considering these impacts in a piecemeal manner. Loss of biodiversity in marine ecosystems, overgrazing, overfishing, coastal development and other human activities all contribute to the loss of biodiversity and therefore degradation of the ecosystem.

Interactions between sectors to deal with the cumulative effects of human influences on ecosystems setting common goals for the protection or management of ecosystems. A policy for the protection of endangered marine species, for example, could affect recreational and commercial fisheries, mining, shipping and tourism sectors to name a few. More effective ecosystem management would result from the collective adoption of policies by all sectors, rather than each sector creating their own isolated policies.

Changing public perceptions by providing information, raising awareness of current threats and the ecosystems services issues, providing participatory decision making process addressed to the total of 137

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

the local communities, as it is the case of this Project.

Bridging science and policy ensuring that all key players are on the same page by the development of a close communication between managers, resource users, scientists, government bodies and other stakeholders and providing proper engagement between these groups to enable the development of realistic and enforceable management initiatives and effective for ecosystem management.

Embracing change having in mind that coupled social-ecological systems are constantly changing in ways that cannot be fully predicted or controlled. This is possible by the understanding the resilience of ecosystems.

Multiple objectives which are integrated in the Project focusing on the diverse benefits provided by nature, land coastal and marine ecosystems, rather than on single ecosystem services. Such benefits or services include vibrant commercial and recreational agri-pastoral, fisheries, nature, landscape, tourist market, biodiversity conservation and coastal and marine protection.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Sustainable community development requires recognition of the relationship between environment, economics and social instruments within the community. An adaptive management approach to creating sustainable community policy and practice also emphasizes the connection and confluence of those elements. Looking into the cultural mechanisms which contribute to a community and ecosystem services value system often highlights the parallel to adaptive management practices, with emphasis on feedback learning, and its treatment of uncertainty and unpredictability.

Often this is the result of indigenous knowledge and historical decisions of societies deeply rooted in ecological practices. By applying an adaptive management approach to community development the resulting systems can develop built in sustainable practice and the Project results could be viewed as a set of experiments designed to reveal processes that build or sustain resilience. It requires, and facilitates, a social context with flexible and open institutions and multi-level governance systems that allow for learning and increase adaptive capacity without foreclosing future development options.

In an ever changing world, adaptive management appeals to many practices seeking sustainable solutions by offering a framework for decision making that proposes to support a sustainable future which "conserves and nurtures the diversity â&#x20AC;&#x201D; of species, of human opportunity, of learning institutions and of economic optionsâ&#x20AC;?(The Environmental Advisory Council, 2002, p. 1121).

Because of the lack of control and predictability of coupled social-ecological systems, an adaptive management approach will be developed as a structured, iterative process of robust decision making with an aim to reducing uncertainty over time via system monitoring. In this way, decision making simultaneously meets one or more resource management objectives and, either passively or actively, accrues information needed to improve future management.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Because of the complexity of biodiversity, incomplete taxonomic knowledge, and high cost of total biodiversity assessments, monitoring relies on indicators. The biodiversity indicators being monitored may be qualitative (e.g. presence or absence of an indicator species) or quantitative (abundance or population density of a species, distribution area of a habitat, number of typical species in the habitat, etc.). On the other hand, monitoring the biodiversity and the ecosystem services it could develop

138

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

conflicts on the relationship between sustainable resource maintenance and human demand for use of natural resources. Therefore, socioeconomics factors significantly affect natural resource management.

Our goal is to fulfill the demand for a given resource without causing harm to the ecosystem, or jeopardizing the future of the resource. Partnerships between ecosystem managers, natural resource managers and stakeholders should be encouraged in order to promote a more sustainable use of limited natural resources. In this contect the selected monitoring and assessment schemes have to consider the overall integrity of the ecosystem. Historically, some natural resources have experienced limited human disturbance and therefore have been able to subsist naturally.

Because of the lack of control and predictability of coupled social-ecological systems, an adaptive management approach will be developed to support monitoring, as a structured, iterative process of robust decision making with an aim to reducing uncertainty over time via system monitoring. In this way, decision making simultaneously meets one or more resource management objectives and, either passively or actively, accrues information needed to improve future management. The challenge in using the adaptive management approach lies in finding the correct balance between gaining knowledge to improve management in the future and achieving the best short-term outcome based on current knowledge.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Monitoring the Project results is a key issue and also one of the most important tasks, particularly in complex situations, which most conservation activities are. Producing data and documentation on biodiversity conservation is the major reason for keeping records aiming at improving conservation management in the area concerned. Conservation objectives are not, or should not be, time-bound, so that the need for management of some form should outlive the involvement of any given individuals.

However, much successful conservation action depends on the expertise of particular individuals. Ways need to be found of transmitting this expertise to succeeding generations of managers. Oral transmission and learning-by-doing are very often the most successful of these, but there are almost certain to be gaps and discontinuities at times when these forms of transmission are broken. Permanent records â&#x20AC;&#x201C; written words, photographs, video or tape-recording â&#x20AC;&#x201C; can play a vital role in filling this gap.

This form of documentation does not necessarily have to be highly formalised.

Documentation in conservation management activities is also important for our case where different interest groups are involved. Sooner or later disputes are almost certain to arise over why a given set of actions has been carried out. The better the decision-making process has been documented, the more easily such disputes can be resolved. Documentation should concentrate on what decisions have been made, on actions to be undertaken and designated responsibilities with brief justification.

The monitoring results, based on practices explanations and reliable documentation could serve many purposes not only scientifc but also social as they could be used to help dissemination, spreading knowledge and helping to overcome the barriers to learning from experience. Narratives of successful conservation action are some of the most powerful communication tools available of what happened and what has to be done.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Monitoring thus contrasts to surveys, in which biodiversity is measured at a single point in time, e.g. to determine the current distribution of a species and also in wchich - in general - progress made under 139

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

this actions is valuable. In order to better understand the level of the efficiancy of the selected monitoring scheme is necessary to assess regularly the results and the causes for change in status and trends, including biodiversity monitoring which must also cover measurements of environmental pressures. Because of the complexity of the Project actions and of biodiversity conservation concerns, biodiversity indicators should have to be monitored in qualitative and quantitative aspects.

This is an important field of studies and researches in order to identify components of biological diversity important for its conservation and sustainable use and to relate them with the Project concrete and measurable results. It is a complex work to do identifying processes and categories of activities which have or are likely to have significant adverse impacts on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, and monitor their effects through sampling and other techniques.

In this action the focus is limited to the monitoring of two main components of biodiversity: species and habitats toghether with the ecosystem services. For these main components, various properties shall be monitored, e.g., trends in populations, distribution, community composition, habitat quality etc. based on data and observations issued by the Project concrete actions. In order to allow reliable inferences a sound statistical sampling design and appropriate analytical methods should be employed. Such aspects of the Project results monitoring will be provided by this action and will be enforced by the action F7, aiming at consolidating the Project results within the After LIFE Plan. In this way valuable tools will provide scientific support for further implementation

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of this action are estimated in relation to the personnel costs and the travel costs. Other costs concerning workshops equipement, in situs visits, etc, is calculated under the monitoring sub-actions which are included in the context of the Project actions A1, A2, A3, A4, C1, C2, C3, C4 and C5

140

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

D.2 Monitoring of the impact of the socio-economic impact of the project actions

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The Project Manager will be responsible for the coordination of the sectoral assessment studies under the supervision of Tilos Park Association (Coordinating Beneficiary) Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) An assessment of the socio-economic impact of all the project actions on the local economy and population, as well as an assessment on the ecosystem functions restoration shall be provided on the base (a) of the results of actions C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 and (b) of the studies consolidating the data and results over the project lifetime, which shall be delivered with the Final Report, which will be elaborated by the each beneficiary responsible per action under the control and the coordination of the Project Manager, who will assist the Coordinating Beneficiary.

More particularly assessment studies of the socio-economic impact of the project, as well as an assessment on the ecosystem functions restoration shall be elaborated and provided for every concrete action in order to be compared and composed and then to be composed in single integrated report.

The sectoral assessment studies are presented following: SUB-ACTIONS D.2.1. Assessment of actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Actions A1, C1 Assessment of the socioeconomic and ecosystem services: (a) impact on the profitability of farms; (b) new farming activities creation; (c) impact on the cooperation between farmers, livestock keepers, and other local actors; (d) decrease of local conflicts on land and grazing management; (e) degrees of annual plants diversity; (f) impact on erodibility, soil and water resources; (g) overall carbon footprint;

141

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(h) transfer of information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources; (i) social and economic benefits of conservation.

D.2.2. Assessment of Actions related with marine environment, fisheries and the fishing industry - Actions A2, C2, C3 Knowing the condition of fishery, including also the problems faced by professionals in each area, allowing better the assessment of the prevailed conditions and would then lead to the adoption of a more appropriate fisheries’ management policy. In particular, for coastal fisheries which is one of the many activities taking place in the coastal zone, fisheries policy should be harmonized with all the different uses and ultimately be integrated into a holistic management model, which comes the synthetic view of both natural (biotic and abiotic) parameters of the ecosystem and the socio-economic activities that occur therein.

The evaluation and proposals of the development of alternative professional fishermen activities in all islands (for example fishery tourism, installation of artificial reef, etc.) shall provide an important conclusions about mentalities, possibilities and difficulties raised, developing statistical models on alternative scenarios for the sustainable management of marine and fishery resources in the region In particular, for coastal fisheries which is one of the many activities taking place in the coastal zone, fisheries policy should be harmonized with all the different uses and ultimately be integrated into a holistic management model, which comes the synthetic view of both natural (biotic and abiotic) parameters of the ecosystem and the socio-economic activities that occur therein.

The registration and description of the current fishery’s situation (production, fishing fleet capacity, fishing techniques, fishing organizations, analyzing the existing management system, etc.) shall provide the necessary data to ensure the assessment of the socio-economic impact and of the ecosystem functions restoration of the project actions on the local economy and population, and more particularly of: a.

the economic status of coastal fisheries;

b.

the cost of maintenance and possible replacement of fishing equipment;

c.

the coastal land and their relationships with fisheries;

Social and economic profile of the region will be studied on the basis of data collected from the questionnaires.

The questionnaires, which will be equal to 20-25% of vessels registered in any local fishery association.

The questions will be listed – and that will be accompanied by a cover letter of clarification, – will relate to: (i) Fishing costs and costs of fishermen; (ii) link of fisheries resources of the region with other resources; (iii) the use and management of resources and assessment of these; (iv) the existing – if sustained – management and development strategy; (v) the land uses;

142

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

(vi) other activities in the region, besides fishing, and any competition between them; The duration of this sub Action is 36 months D.2.3. Assessment of Actions related with coastal and marine ecosystems improvement Actions A3, C4 (coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems) Monitoring the ecosystem functions restoration of the project actions in relation with eventual socioeconomic impact shall be provided an assessment of socio-economic impact of the coastal and marine ecosystems improvements.

A prognostic coastal management tool will be available, which can assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools.

A geo-spatial web-GIS flood forecasting support system will be also developed as the primary means of the relevant hazard identification.

D.2.4. Assessment of Actions related with tourism - Actions A4, C5 The potential impacts of the proposed actions concerning the sustainable tourism practices, developments or activities shall be monitored and assessed and regional and local governments will normally undertake evaluations of the adequacy of impact assessments of tourism developments or activities submitted.

These evaluations will need to be undertaken by an appropriately qualified team, drawing on a range of expertise, including expertise in tourism and in biodiversity management, and also involving those indigenous and local communities that would be affected by the proposals. There should be public access to the documentation.

In relation to indigenous and local communities, monitoring and evaluation shall include development and use of appropriate tools to monitor and evaluate tourism impacts on the economy of indigenous and local communities, particularly their food and health security, traditional knowledge, practices and customary livelihoods, using indicators and early warning systems, taking into account traditional knowledge, innovation and practices of indigenous and local communities.

This may include: i.

Generation of income and employment from tourism (long-term and short-term);

ii.

Proportion of tourism income retained in the local community;

iii. Effectiveness of multi-stakeholder processes for management of biodiversity and sustainable tourism; iv. Effectiveness of impact management; v.

Contribution of tourism to the well-being of the local population;

vi. Visitor impacts and visitor satisfaction. vii. Development of infrastructure and services. viii. Providing new jobs and funds for development or maintenance of sustainable practices.

143

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

ix. Providing alternative and supplementary ways for communities to receive revenue from biological diversity. x. Generating education and empowerment; xi. Tourist satisfaction and experience gained at tourist destination. xii. Influx of people and social degradation (e.g. local prostitution, drug abuse, etc.); xiii. Impacts on children and youth; xiv. Vulnerability to the changes in the flow of tourist arrivals which may result in sudden loss of income and jobs in times of downturn; xv. Impacts on indigenous and local communities and cultural values; xvi. Impacts on health and the integrity of local cultural systems; xvii. Erosion of traditional practices and lifestyles; xix. Loss of access by indigenous and local communities to their land and resources as well as sacred sites, which are integral to the maintenance of traditional knowledge systems and traditional lifestyles.

Measures shall be taken to ensure that indigenous and local communities involved in, or affected by tourism, have the opportunity to be involved effectively in monitoring and evaluation.

If the information provided is not sufficient, or the impact assessment inadequate, then further impact assessment studies may need to be undertaken. The proposer may be requested to undertake such studies, or the Government may decide to undertake these studies, and may request funds from the proposer for this purpose, as appropriate. Other stakeholders, including biodiversity managers and indigenous and local communities that may be affected by a proposed development, may also provide their assessments of impacts associated with specific proposals for tourism developments or activities, and provisions may be needed to ensure that any such assessments are taken into account by decision-makers.

In the final Report a monitoring system shall be developed and presented concerning the assessment of the socio-economics results of the overall project actions.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action aims at monitoring the socio-economic impact of the overall project actions recognizing NATURA 2000 benefits and demonstrating the economic benefits of conservation measures in line with the interests of the community, even though knowledge about the value of biodiversity, ecosystems and the services they provide is steadily increasing, there is still an apparent lack of quantitative/monetary and well-documented information on the socio-economic benefits associated with protected areas, including Natura 2000.

Existing information on the socio-economic significance of Natura 2000 is mainly related to benefits arising from direct and indirect employment supported by Natura 2000 sites. In addition, data is available on the socio-economic impacts of cultural ecosystem services, in particular tourism and recreation.

This action assessing integrated results and the data provided by the specific and concrete measures taken under the project actions will be very useful to give a clear shortage of well-documented examples 144

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

demonstrating and, in particular, quantifying the value of other ecosystem services relevant in the context of the actions objectives.

Furthermore, it will provide information on the level of the expected social commitments and consensus developing concerning the acceptance of the demonstration projects as well as of the appreciation of the value of Natura 2000 in both, the communities and the public policy.

The action shall also deliver important data and information about the benefits of biodiversity and Natura 2000 sites in order to recognize them at an early stage in the formulation of the wide range of projects that they will consider. For this purpose a special information/working tool for decision-makers should be elaborated. The results of assessing cases should quantify the potential economic benefits arising from such investments and offer the ability to assess different ‘options’ of the actions.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The most important constrain is the complexity of biodiversity. Toghether with the incomplete taxonomic knowledge and the high cost of total biodiversity assessments, monitoring issues relies on indicators.

The biodiversity issies have to be monitored in qualitative (e.g. presence or absence of an indicator species) or quantitative (abundance or population density of a species, distribution area of a habitat, number of typical species in the habitat, etc.).

Typically, impact assessment considers such things as Red List species and impacts on protected areas. However, it often fails to look at the dynamics of ecosystems (the various ecological processes and functions), as well as the interdependencies between socio-economic and natural systems. Also, the distribution effects of positive and negative impacts of development on, and implications for access to, biodiversity, are seldom addressed; the most vulnerable sectors are often most affected by changes to ecosystems services brought about by development. Unless the full spectrum of functions provided by natural systems, as well the objectives of biodiversity conservation are fully integrated into policyformulation and planning, we run the risk of sanctioning development that undermines the very basis for our wellbeing. That is, biodiversity mainstreaming into development strategies and programs is essential to poverty alleviation and development.

This action aims at providing a ‘Biodiversity-inclusive’ impact assessment using an approach that addresses not only the intrinsic values of biological diversity, but also the range of direct and indirect use values, as well as non-use values associated with species, communities, ecosystems and natural landscapes linked in each time with the market mechanisms and the need to provide economic opportunities, jobs and social coherence in order to maintain young people in these remote islands.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Human wellbeing is related to security, having the basic material for a good life, health, good social relations, and freedom of choice and action. Ecosystem services influence many of these factors, playing a key role in providing materials for a good life, health, secure access to resources and security from disasters. Whether we are wealthy or poor, or live in urban or rural areas, we rely heavily on ecosystem services.

People may use biodiversity directly or may rely on it indirectly and other value ecosystems and their living components for their visual, spiritual, sense of place or cultural attributes. Conserving biodiversity is thus seen to give us ‘adaptation insurance’.

145

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

The basis for ecosystem services is healthy ecosystems. The loss of biological diversity destabilizes ecosystems and makes them more vulnerable to shocks and disturbances such as floods, which may further reduce their ability to provide for human well-being. The rural poor, who are often directly dependent on ecosystem services, are most vulnerable to the negative consequences of deteriorating ecosystems.

Despite broad agreement to achieve a significant reduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss biodiversity is in decline at all levels and geographical scales. The average abundance of species is on the decline: many forms of pollution, the spread of alien organisms, and intensified harvest, hunting and fishing is leading to this decline.

The project actions objectives emphasize that human beings are an integral part of wider ecosystems recognizing, amongst others, that the objectives of management of land, water and living resources are a matter of societal choice. Impact assessment and management will consider the effects of activities beyond the particular development site, the conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, the ecosystems management within the limits of their functioning etc.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action will monitor and assess the socio-economic impact of a number of important concrete actions, which the objectives and practices emerge a varity of results in different level. The assessment of the biodiversity and ecosystem services value in the context of this action is based on the consideration and valuation of many different parameters. A number of tools will be developed in order to support the assessment procedure, which is focused on the impact of the ecosystem services, providing by the project. The valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services has to take into consideration a set of complexe criteria which are closely related with local societies.

The potential Ecological Footprint of the islands after the project actions implementation has to be assessed toghethr with the environmental impact providing by the nature and biodiversity conservation measures. The study of all the biodiversity offsets demands work on the spearhead of the Business and Biodiversity Opportunities emerging through the project actions. And also it is essential to assess the efficiency of the financial mechanisms which will be delivered, such as the biodiversity banking or mitigation banking, the payment schemes for biodiversity and the mechanisms that give nature a value and force the economy to look into its blind spots. Thus may help to conserve biodiversity as a vital element for te local sustainable developement.

Socio-ecological systems thinking and socio-ecological resilience which will explore the dynamics of complex social-ecological systems have to be used as well as Sustainability Assessment which strive to bridge gaps between social and ecological thinking, introducing criteria that â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;talk toâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the need to build and maintain socio-ecological system integrity. A basis indicator of the project progrees will be if the project will have the dynamic to make the business case for considering biodiversity based on a viable economy while ensuring social cohesion.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of this action are estimated in telation with the personnel costs, the travel costs and the necessary equipement

146

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

E. Public awareness and dissemination of results

147

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

E.1 Information, education, training and consultation workshops on sustainable agriculture and pastoral sustainable practices

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) The overall goal of the Grazing Land improvements as it is reflected in the actions A1 and C1 aiming at providing a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Sustainable Land Managementâ&#x20AC;? is the basis for local economic development, food security and sustainable livelihoods while restoring the ecological integrity. Disseminating the objective of these actions could be acgieved â&#x20AC;&#x153;To provide land users and managers with the financial incentives, enabling policy, institutional and capacity for effective adoption of Sustainable Land Management in the pilot four districts areas (Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos islands) while enhancing sustainable livelihoods and community based natural resources management.

This action aims at the promotion of the consumption of more sustainable products; Acting responsibly in line with the interests of the community is an integral part of the corporate culture within the framework of the Sustainability Strategy, where four topics have been given top priority: the sustainable product range policy and the promotion of the consumption of more sustainable products; resource and climate protection; satisfaction and involvement of employees plus social responsibility.

To this end, the actions will demonstrate that quality goes much further than the primary properties of the products and also encompasses ecological and social aspects. The aim, therefore, is to develop and market products that are more sustainable. Conserving biological diversity is an essential component of the ecological quality of products.

Public awareness and dissemination works will be realized through the organization of public information meetings, seminars, and especially practical field demonstration and guided visits, but also through congress participation and scientific publications. The information and dissemination material will be available to the Project website as well as in leaflets, booklets, notice boards. For further dissemination the regional and local media will be used.

The dissemination work will be based on the results of the preliminary stage, concerning the preparation of the implementation of the demonstration projects, providing by the training and educational work of farmers, pastors and stakeholders involved on agricultural and pastoral practices, in each island, identifying local resources (natural, and productive), the islands biodiversity and the cultivation and pastoral practices.

On the other hand, after having conducted the consultation workshops, per island, where specific target groups (farmers, pastors, decision makers) will be involved, it will be more easy to provide information on the selected cultivation areas and on the chosen practices and also to demonstrate the decisions making process adopted making more people to be involved in agricultural and pastoral projects implementation.

148

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

The basic element of this action is, however, the training and the education of the relative involved target groups.

Informing and educating the stakeholders and the specific social groups (farmers, stockbreeders, fishermen, cooperative structures, etc.) by providing training seminars and consultation workshops in each island, it will possible to initiate young farmers and livestock keepers to participate in the demonstration projects.

Guidelines for an agricultural and pastoral environmental management plan to conserve and enhance biodiversity shall be provided.

During the training, education and dissemination sessions information will be given on the funding possibilities provided by the National Rural Development Programme (RDP) defining concrete financial opportunities and tools which could be used by the participants in the demonstration projects and finance these after LIFE period.

A regional Rural network will be also created in order to operate within the framework of the RDP foreseen National Rural Network (NRN), in which are participating, as members, Chambers, Research Institutes, Environmental Organizations, LAGs etc. Members of the Network are also agencies of the Ministry for Agricultural Development and Food and the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climatic Change, which are responsible of the management and implementation of some measures of the RDP. It is also possible to use the technical assistance for the inter-territorial and transnational collaboration projects within axis 4 â&#x20AC;&#x153;Leader approachâ&#x20AC;? of the RDP or/and to build collaboration with the National Network for Rural Development.

During the training workshops possible interconnection should be provided with regional and local rural and agricultural organisations in order to exchange experience and analyse best practices related to practices and procedures enabling farmers to product a better quality products and to secure their incomes.

The diffusion of the results will be ensured at regional and local level.

The training and dissemination actions will be organised in thematical workshops and consultation meetings, in seminars and conferencem but also by publications, such as newsletters, magazines, manuals on project actions subjects Six meetings with local stakeholders per island (6x4=24) are necessary to inform, discuss and decide, after concrete participatory process, on basic project parameters.

Expected persons per island: 50 and 100 (Rhodos, Kos) Total: 300 persons.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is a basic one on the field of training and educate the stakeholders invilved in the actions A1, C1 and D1 in order to initiate sustainable and profitable agriculture and pastural practices and subsequently infuence farmers livelihoods to participate in the demonstration projects.

Stockbreeders and farmers will be involved and participate in the demonstration actions while the rest of the local society will see the results and realize the benefits of nature conservation (environmental and economic) to local societies and therefore will make them more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future.

This action focused on the sustainable management of grazing lands and cultivated areas, due to its 149

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

demonstration character, will transfer information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources and promote education and local awareness. Consequently, it will prove that nature conservation and economic activities are not only possible but they can be profitable, which can be a far reaching future impact for the area.

The results of this action should be combated threats to Biodiversity, due to the unsustainable harvesting of natural resources, including plants and animals, the loss, degradation or fragmentation of ecosystems, while ensuring the sustainability of agriculture and forestry, and the integrating of biodiversity concerns into the development and implementation of other policies.

With respect to agriculture, existing regional policies and instruments under the CAP and the new Multiannual Financial Framework will contribute to this target, enhancing synergies and maximise coherence between biodiversity protection objectives and those of these and other policies.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) A significant objective is to promote more sustainable consumption on a large scale and offer products with added sustainable value at attractive prices. In this context there is a great opportunity to develop ideas for new products and projects through addressing the issue of biodiversity.

Within the actions A1, C1 will be also developed a label for more sustainable products that have a significantly lower impact on the environment and society during their manufacturing, processing and usage. Sustainability aspects are taken into account along the product life cycle and will be analysed by independent institutes with respect to relevant ecological and social hot spots. The aim is to eliminate the hot spots or reduce their scope. This requires taking various measures along the product life cycle that are developed and implemented together with external experts.

Constrains may be derived by financial problems concerning the payment of crops and equipment. This parameter will be faced since the start of these project actions investigating the existing financial possibilities through the Ministry for Rural Development Programmes for young farmers and also through the Contract Farming Programmes, already being implemented by Banks and Rural Associations.

The Contract Farming Programmes support and modernize the agricultural sector, so it can grow into a strong pillar that fosters the growth of the Greek economy. These Programmes cover the entire production, supply and processing chain of agricultural production, by supporting carefully planned, mutually beneficial partnerships between farmers and businesses that trade in, process and sell agricultural products. Bankâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role is that of coordinator and financier to further support by guaranteeing the necessary liquidity, so that can continue to product and achieve better prices.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Achieving a sustainable and profitable agriculture and subsequently ensuring farmers livelihoods is a big challenge.

The integration of livestock and diversification of the commonly specialized production appears to be a natural long term process to achieve resilience, develop strong relations and mutually reinforce activities amongst livestock keepers and farmers. Key conservation agriculture assumption is that satisfactory yields should be achieved by combining agricultural activities with sustainable environmental practices through the enhancement of natural biological processes above and below the ground. Sustainable

150

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

agriculture represents an innovative paradigm to promote a new approach to management of farming systems and of livestock keeping activities, integrating into the traditional agricultural practices, by developing a holistic approach tailored to local ecosystems.

Stockbreeders and farmers will be involved and participate in the demonstration actions while the rest of the local society will see the results and realize the benefits of nature conservation (environmental and economic) to local societies and therefore will make them more susceptible to widespread implementation in the future.

This will transfer information and know-how on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources and promote education and local awareness.

The results of this action should be combated threats to Biodiversity, due to the unsustainable harvesting of natural resources, including plants and animals, the loss, degradation or fragmentation of ecosystems, while ensuring the sustainability of agriculture and forestry, and the integrating of biodiversity concerns into the development and implementation of other policies. With respect to agriculture, existing regional policies and instruments it will contribute to enhance synergies and maximise coherence between biodiversity protection objectives and those of other policies.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Progress shall be measured in relation (a) with the number of participants in the workshops (b) with the number of the farmers and livestock keeprs who will accept to participated in the proposed demonstration project.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of the main expenditures used from this action is estimated in relation with (a) the training material and documentation which will produce (b) with the number of the workshops or/and meetings and events (c) the travel costs and (d) the personnel costs

151

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

E.2 Information, education, training workshops on coastal and marine biodiversity and co-management with the fisheries

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HCMR

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action supports in public awareness and dissemination matters the initial actions A2, C2, C3, D2 concerning the coastal and marine biodiversity and the fishery aiming at a sustainable management of the marine environment. As it is already explain in the description of the action C2 the study includes the recording and assessing of marine biodiversity, the impact of exotic species in endemic fish fauna in the research area and the analytical study of fishery resources for the improvement of their sustainable management and. In addition, proposals for alternative professional activities of anglers, such as fishing tourism as well as a project for the creation and implementation of artificial reefs will be developed.

An important step in a preliminary stage is the training of the stakeholders involved in the frame of the actions C2 and C3, which mainly are the local fishermen (professional and recreational) and the competent local and regional authorities, organisations and stakeholders related to the management of fisheries resources or individuals engaged in the trade of fishery and to a large community of public, and policy and decision makers. Dissemination will take place during the project to get feedback and input from external experts and to inform about the progress of the project activities and in the end of the project to provide end users with innovative scientific results.

Training and consultation workshop with local stakeholders will be organised in the four islands, as well as in the islands of Rhodes and Kos, during the project operational period and mainly during the preparatory period.

Four meetings with local stakeholders per island (4x4=16) will be, at least, necessary in order to inform, discuss and decide, after concrete participatory process and consultation on the basic actions objectives and parameters. Expected persons per island: 50 + 200 (Rhodes, Kos) Total: 400 persons During the training processes the professional fishermen will provide their data concerning their landings, their effort and will collaborate with the scientists to supply of biological samples in order to study the biology, ecology and population dynamics of fishery resources in the study area. In accordance to this, the socio and economic data of the fishery will be also collected through questionnaires completed by them.

In the same time and in order to study the impacts of the recreational fishery on the professional one and the fishery resources, the close cooperation with the recreational fishermen is also necessary in order to enrich the knowledge and gain the integrated fishery situation in the project study area.

The local and regional authorities will supply with data regarding the fleet and any other data concerning the fishery in the area. The data related to the trade and any possible processing of the catch will be

152

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

collected by the most appropriate persons.

Brochures, leaflets, publications, etc., specialised on Integrated Coastal Management and sustainable fishing will be provide, to be distributed. Films, documentaries and other information and dissemination material will be provided concerning the whole project objectives, actions, and results.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action supports the actions A3, C4, D3 informing and educating stakeholders and inhabitants about the protection and conservation concerns of the Coastal Biodiversity, focused on the coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems, promoting awareness in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (dir. 92/43 EEC) and as natural flood prevention and natural formations.

Training and educational courses are necessary in order to better understand the importance of the coastal zone and the threats. Through the training courses in situ during the implementation of the concrete demonstration projects to the small coastal wetlands and sand dunes of Tilos island is more easier to understand the relation of small wetland and Dune with halting the loss of biodiversity and climate change.

Learning of the experience issued form the benefits of the undertaken measures will provide information on conservation needs assessment to guide towards more sustainable practices concerning the use of the coastal ecosystems, including restoration actions which could be readily associated with ecotourism activities. The environmental education programmes will enhance public awareness and add value to the area.

The participation of the local stakeholders and the inhabitants, in collaboration with the local authorities, in order to install permanently a weather station in Tilos shall contribute to educate and train local students and municipal employees on (a) periodic retrieval of the weather station data, (b) data analysis, (c) constant beach profile measurements (d) the use of a database for beach retreat projections, especially after stormy events. A much better understanding of the risks and vulnerability associated with climate-change driven erosion, is required for the development of appropriate adaptation measures, which enhance the long-term sustainability of beaches and their multiple ecologic and socio-economic uses.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The actual conditions of fishery, including the coastal zone fishery are affected the fishes population and thus affect also the income of the fishers. The problems faced by professionals in each area from the coastal zone fishery allowing better the assessment of the prevailed conditions and would then lead to the adoption of a more appropriate fisheriesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; management policy. In particular, for coastal fisheries which is one of the many activities taking place in the coastal zone, it is necessary to inform the fishers about new fisheries policy which contribute to the development of a model, which comes the synthetic view of both natural (biotic and abiotic) parameters of the ecosystem and the socio-economic activities that occur therein.

The study of the social and economic profile of the region on the basis of data collected from the questionnaires will provide good information about mentalities, practices, fishing costs and costs of fishermen, link of fisheries resources of the region with other resources, the use and management of resources and assessment of these, the existing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; if sustained â&#x20AC;&#x201C; management and development strategy, the land uses, other activities in the region, besides fishing, and any competition between 153

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

them.

The direct collaboration with the fishers and their associations will contribute to fight any possible constraint through the open dialogue and the wise information.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The proposed educational and training procedures will significantly enhance knowledge/advance in the beach processes and morphodynamic modeling, the monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc. Moreover, it will benefit the administration, local authorities and other stakeholders as well as the general public through the creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches, also permitting (after systematic training) a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox.

In addition, training and education could also assist in enhancing the sustainable development prospects of coastal communities and ecosystems in the longer term. The results of the project will benefit from the application of multidisciplinary research approaches/techniques.

In the same time local societies, inhabitants, students, scientist will have the opportunity to be informed about the prognostic coastal management tool, which could assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) The beaches of the islands are amongst the most erosion-sensitive constituents of the coastal system, accounting for most of the observed coastal erosion. They are also extremely critical components of the coastal system. They are not only important ecological habitats in their own right but also front/protect from sea inundation and flooding other significant coastal habitats (e.g. wetlands and lagoons) and valuable coastal economic assets/infrastructure such as urban and industrial developments and coastal roads, railways and airports. Moreover, as tourism has become almost synonymous with beach recreational activities beaches form an extremely important economic resource for the islands. Climate change and particularly the sea level rise controls beach erosion, as beaches respond to the rising sea levels with retreat and/or drowning.

This action will address information and will arise public awareness on the impacts and benefits of coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems related with sea level rise and climate change as well as on the beach erosion and severely impact coastal populations, activities, infrastructure and assets. At the same time, the demonstration actions results will be disseminated to better understand the value of the beaches, which represent a most valuable natural resource, being the main focus of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sun and beachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Mediterranean tourism. As the beach recreational experience (and the accompanying economic activity) is sensitive to the beach carrying capacity it appears that the sustainability of the beach-based touristic sector will be challenged by the increasing beach erosion and the inundation/damage of the coastal environment and of the related infrastructure particularly at island destinations. Furthermore, beaches provide dynamic protection to the coastal environments, they front e.g. back-barrier systems and cliffs, and interrelate with coastal habitats.

154

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The stuff effort has been estimated according the man months above all involved in analyses and elaborations. Another part of the budget is travel costs of the personnel in the study area taking into account the expenses for travel and daily allowances, personnel expenses, consumables. The funding of new equipment will be limited to set up vesselâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operative costs, travel. Other direct costs and new personnel in contract (4 PERSONS IN Action 2). A high cost is due to the rent of the fishing boats for the surveys in order to estimate the landings and to collect biological data of the fishery resources.

155

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

E.3 Training and education on coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems, related with natural floods prevention and climate change.

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Training of local employees and students will take place every time the scientific team visits the islands, but finally a complete guide will join the appropriate activities that should be implemented for the systematic monitoring of the beaches changes.

The results and conclusions of the action will be released to local mass media and they will also be published in national and international congresses and/or peer-reviewed journals.

In parallel, information shall be available on the physical characteristics of the small wetland and sand dunes system and coastal biodiversity and their multiple values as tourist attraction, environmental education and climate change mitigation A database of the spatial (and â&#x20AC;&#x201C;where available- other geo-environmental) characteristics of the four island beaches (Chalki, Nisyros, Simi, Tilos), using widely-available, web-based information, shall also be available on the project web-site linked with the South Aegean Region, the Municipalities and other Associated Beneficiaries web-sites. This database could form a valuable coastal management tool, assisting also in the fulfillment of relevant legal obligations (e.g. Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Directive)).

Scientific documentation on the dynamics of the sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins on the basis of hydrological modeling and field observations with particular emphasis on extreme events, will be disposed to Universities in order to assist in the development of improved scientific approaches to monitor/model sediment loads and yields and assess water/sediment discharges of the small island drainage basins.

This documentation and studies will also be very useful in the implementation of relevant EC legislation (e.g. Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive).

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action supports the actions A3, C4, D3 informing and educating stakeholders and inhabitans about the protection and conservation concerns of the Coastal Biodiversity, focused on the coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems, promoting awerness in relation to the protection and enhancement of ecosystems as priority habitats (dir. 92/43 EEC) and as natural flood prevention and natural formations.

Training and educaational courses are necessary in order to better understand the importance of the coastal zone and the threats. Through the training courses in situ during the implementation of the

156

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

concrete demonstration projects to the small coastal wetlands and sand dunes of Tilos island is more easier to understand the relation of small wetland and Dune with halting the loss of biodiversity and climate change.

Learning of the experience issued form the benefits of the undertaken measures will provide information on conservation needs assessment to guide towards more sustainable practices concerning the use of the coastal ecosystems, including restoration actions which could be readily associated with ecotourism activities. The environmental education programmes will enhance public awareness and add value to the area.

The participation of the local stakeholders and the inhabitants, in collaboration with the local authorities, in order to install permanently a weather station in Tilos shall contribute to educate and train local students and municipal employees on (a) periodic retrieval of the weather station data, (b) data analysis, (c) constant beach profile measurements (d) the use of a database for beach retreat projections, especially after stormy events. A much better understanding of the risks and vulnerability associated with climate-change driven erosion, is required for the development of appropriate adaptation measures, which enhance the long-term sustainability of beaches and their multiple ecologic and socio-economic uses.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action support training and dissemination needs of the project actions A3, C4, D4 aiming at consolidating coastal hazard data bases and methodologies/tools which will assess the vulnerability of the coastal systems to sea level rise/extreme events. However, these tools face several limitations in respect of their coastal retreat/inundation forecasts with appropriate accuracy resolution and of other necessary input parameters such as coastal hydrodynamic information. However, these constraints will be eliminated via the methodological tools which will be used and in situ investigations.

The training will inform about coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems processes and morphodynamic modeling, the monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc. Moreover, it will educate the regional and local authorities and other stakeholders and the general public through the creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches, also permitting (after systematic training) a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox.

In addition, the action could also assist in enhancing the sustainable development prospects of coastal communities and ecosystems in the longer term.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The proposed educational and training procedures will significantly enhance knowledge/advance in the beach processes and morphodynamic modeling, the monitoring/modeling of small island drainage basins, the protection of onshore ecosystems etc. Moreover, it will benefit the administration, local authorities and other stakeholders as well as the general public through the creation of a web-based comprehensive inventory of the four island beaches, also permitting (after systematic training) a rapid quantitative assessment of their climate-driven coastal erosion/flooding risk through a user-friendly toolbox.

In addition, training and education could also assist in enhancing the sustainable development

157

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

prospects of coastal communities and ecosystems in the longer term. The results of the project will benefit from the application of multidisciplinary research approaches/techniques.

In the same time local societies, inhabitans, students, scientist will have the opportunity to be informed about the prognostic coastal management tool, which could assess the range of beach retreats at a regional level and provide forecasts that are not limited by the accuracy/resolution of the available DEMs of the coastal areas in question, as is the case with all existing models/tools.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) The beaches of the islands are amongst the most erosion-sensitive constituents of the coastal system, accounting for most of the observed coastal erosion. They are also extremely critical components of the coastal system. They are not only important ecological habitats in their own right but also front/protect from sea inundation and flooding other significant coastal habitats (e.g. wetlands and lagoons) and valuable coastal economic assets/infrastructure such as urban and industrial developments and coastal roads, railways and airports. Moreover, as tourism has become almost synonymous with beach recreational activities beaches form an extremely important economic resource for the islands. Climate change and particularly the sea level rise controls beach erosion, as beaches respond to the rising sea levels with retreat and/or drowning.

This action will address information and will arise public awareness on the impacts and benefits of coasta wetlands and sand dunes exosystems related with sea level rise and climate change as well as on the beach erosion and severely impact coastal populations, activities, infrastructure and assets. At the same time, the demonstration actions results will be disseminated to better understand the value of the beaches, which represent a most valuable natural resource, being the main focus of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sun and beachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Mediterranean tourism. As the beach recreational experience (and the accompanying economic activity) is sensitive to the beach carrying capacity it appears that the sustainability of the beach-based touristic sector will be challenged by the increasing beach erosion and the inundation/damage of the coastal environment and of the related infrastructure particularly at island destinations. Furthermore, beaches provide dynamic protection to the coastal environments, they front e.g. back-barrier systems and cliffs, and interrelate with coastal habitats.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the personnel costs, the travel costs, the guided in situs visits and also with the costs of the dissemination and public awarness material which will be produced. Other dissemination actions costs have been calculated under the action E5 (overall project dissemination)

158

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

E.4 Information, training and consultation workshop on sustainable tourism and eco-tourism network establishment

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The University of the Aegean will be responsible for the preparation of the educational material and the training. The CISD will be responsible for the organisation of the workshops and the consultation process.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) 1. Workshops, seminars, conferences and training staff: 1.1. Conducting workshops, consultation, workshops and training seminars for staff, working in the management of natural and rural areas, and training seminars, all involved groups (farmers, fishermen, farmers, tourism operators); 1.2. Environmental education seminars, which will take place during the events in Kos and Rhodes and also in Chalki, Nisyros, Symi and Tilos, participating in the programme, but also in adjacent small islands as the island of Astypalaia, Kalymnos, Karpathos, Kassos, Leros, Megisti; 1.3. Training of staff, executives and representatives of stakeholders involved in the strategic planning process by identifying and exploiting local resources (natural, cultural and productive) until the creation of image based on separate tourist identity of the destination and its visibility.

1.4. Training for owners and employees of tourist companies with emphasis on quality and authenticity (Program Host), with a view to endorsing the principles of socially responsible business and internal control procedures and performance improvement at the enterprise level, with the aim of improving services and maximizing the benefits for business (revenue growth, cost reduction, improved image) and the society.

1.5. Education â&#x20AC;&#x201C; training farmers, pastoralists, fishermen will participate in demonstration projects with the purpose of taking the implementation/establishment of new social structures (cooperative structures, etc.)

2. Special information activities and seminars on islands in the region with homogeneous characteristics as the islands of Kasos, Karpathos, Leros and Megisti, about sustainable practices in agriculture, livestock, fisheries, and tourism based on the demonstration projects and best practices that have been implemented.

3. Three Workshops supporting in the downtown area, such as Kos and Rhodes, areas that have and can play a role to view the available local products within sales networks (e.g. supermarkets,

159

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

gourmet shops, tourist agencies etc.)

The purpose of the action is the continuous update of all relevant social groups and their involvement in making individual decisions, and at the same time, the presentation of the evolution of the program, the identification of potential problems and the training of teachers and staff, so that the knowledge acquired to be used in the most appropriate way.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Consequently, cumulative results will be referred by the action not only for the emergence of high ecological value of the ecosystems of the small islands but also to strengthen local entrepreneurship through training and educational experiences. It is an important goal which support the potential emerging by the actions A4, C5, D4 strengthening also the protected area network and encouraging the role of protected areas as key locations for good practices in the management of sustainable tourism and biodiversity, taking into account the full range of protected area categories. It is also important to highlight the south Aegean small islands comparative advantages in connection with the supply of locally quality produced agricultural and livestock products and with their sale in the structures of the ecotourism.

Promoting education and training on sustainable tourism, which means all nature-based forms of tourism in which the main motivation of the tourists is the observation and appreciation of nature as well as the traditional cultures prevailing in natural areas, should be achieved major benefits.

Promoting education and training on sustainable tourism or ecotourism process should generated new perception and future perspectives concerning economic and social benefits for host communities, organizations and authorities managing natural areas with conservation purposes and providing alternative employment and income opportunities for local communities. These achievements, in the level of understanding and of mentalities shall contribute to make tourism market stakeholders more conscious facilitating the realization of the objectives and the actions proposed. Thus resulting a more active involvement on the project purposes facilitating commitments and achieving consensus towards a Biodiversity and market based tourism.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Change the mass tourism product a sustainable one based on biodiversity, nature, traditional local products and activities focused on the quality an addressed to ecologically aware tourists it is not an objective easily targeted. It is a difficult exercise.

Applying a public-private partnership approach is the only way to explore tourism business opportunities for safeguarding biodiversity linking financial criteria and opportunities in order to demonstrate the benefits. A long-term, site and region-specific economic and nature benefits is needed to highlight the opportunities and constraints faced by the tourism sector in managing biodiversity in a sustainable way, and at the same time achieving economic viability. To this end training information and dissemination play a key role to engage the relevant stakeholders around sustainable tourism criteria. Disseminating best practices issued by the project actions A4 and C5 and the demonstration projects it will be possible to influence an important part of tourism operators and agencies vision and will be therefore clearly presented, designed to make more and better product and services available to tourists, based on the European Charter of the Sustainable Tourism experience to ensure their sustainability in the future.

160

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Other probable difficulties will be appeared in the effort to involve from the first stage different social groups in such a difficult project and thus may cause delays or disagreements. Extensive discussions with all parties involved, can resolve many issues. Also all parties will be bound by a contract of good cooperation and commitment to public participation.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Sharing common visions and various types of benefits, arising from a «Tourism Product Development via Biodiversity and Sustainability» stakeholders involved could also realize the benefits issued by the integration of the biodiversity, rural, coastal and marine conservation concerns and challenges to be faced together tourism sector with indigenous and local communities. It should produce an important added value, not only for biodiversity protection but also for new job creation, fostering local enterprises, participation in tourism enterprises and projects, education, direct investment opportunities, economic linkages and ecological services, using appropriate mechanisms to be established/evolved to capture the benefits.

Training and education workshop will focus on the business sector, which must urgently be engaged in nature conservation and green products and services process in order to offer a better quality, more socially equitable and wealth creating. Efforts must be faster and more responsive to changes in land use, climate and biotech as well as keeping pace with public opinion and consumer preferences. In the context of this action mechanisms directed to the private sector will be investigated and discussed as well as some financing mechanisms, which are already in place.

Sharing various types of benefits, arising from «Tourism Product Development via Biodiversity Sustainability», integrating biodiversity, rural, coastal and marine concerns, together with indigenous and local communities, it should be produced an important added value, not only for biodiversity protection but also for new job creation, fostering local enterprises, participation in tourism enterprises and projects, education, direct investment opportunities, economic linkages and ecological services, using appropriate mechanisms to be established/evolved to capture the benefits.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Developers and operators of tourism facilities and activities should be required to report periodically to designated authorities and to the public on compliance with conditions set out in approvals, and on the condition of biodiversity and the environment in relation to the tourism facilities and activities for which they are responsible.

Prior to the commencement of any new tourism development or activities, an inclusive monitoring and reporting system should be put in place, with indicators to track how tourism actions are mitigating threats to biodiversity, along with agreed upon quantifiable standards indicating thresholds of acceptable change. These should be developed in conjunction with all key stakeholders including indigenous and local communities.

Indicators to cover aspects of management of biodiversity and sustainable tourism, including socioeconomic and cultural aspects, should also be identified and monitored at global, national, and local levels.

Monitoring and surveillance includes, inter alia, the impact of tourism activities on biodiversity, ecosystems and on the surrounding population, taking appropriate preventative actions as necessary;

161

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

the general tourism activities and trends, including tour operations, tourism facilities, and tourist flows in originating and receiving countries, including progress towards sustainable tourism; the generation of income and employment, the proportion of tourism income retained in the local community; the multistakeholder processes effectiveness; ty and sustainable tourism; the contribution of tourism to the wellbeing of the local population; the visitor impacts and visitor satisfaction.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation of the number of persons/hour involved to the training activities and the personnel cost, and also the travel costs. The costs for the production of training documents and materials, the cost for the equipment, etc. are provided in the financial forms.

162

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

E.5 Public awareness and dissemination of the overall project results

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HSIN Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The HSIN will be responsible for the preparation and the organisation of the meetings, seminars, confernce, events etc and the production of the material. The CISD will be responsible for the consultation processes, the production and installation of the project web-site and any e-communication systems, and for the dissemination via the Media. Any document context shall be supervise by the University of Aegean and the HCMR in relation with the thematic sector of their invilvement.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) The project website At the start of the project the domain will be acquired and the design of the official site “LIFE SMIsLE BIO shall be prepared and commissioned.

The web site shall be in both Greek and English languages and shall include sections with one or more subpages (Homepage, Project, Stocks, Partner, News, Documents, Events, Forum, Gallery, Media, Link). The project website will be also linked to the official web-sites of Tilos Park Association and Associating Beneficiaries. It will be a dynamic web page, using modern technologies, (modern form app. application to be used also in smart phones, smart tablets in 3d, and social networks) to reach the target audience, with regular updates and information for the project and the biodiversity and presented specific information on Natura 2000 network, their habitats and selected species, facilitate the effectiveness of information exchange among the project and conservation groups, as well as among members of the project’s network.

A description of the project shall be included with the LIFE logo, and the Natura 2000 logo, and full details of its objectives, actions, progress and results should be provided. The web site shall be put on line within 6 months after the project start and regularly updated during the project period and shall be maintained on-line during at least 5 years after the project's end.

All the information will be available free, via web-site and also in the form of Atlas, to local and national authorities, on school libraries and selected visitor centers, offering important documentation, georeferenced image points, universal projection per Island, category of services and products, etc.

Actions of environmental education, awareness and disclosure: 

leaflets about the project and its target species,



booklet for children,

163

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1



environmental education actions at schools,



special editions targeting the general public, tourists and visitors;



demonstration of habitat management actions;



awareness actions targeted at local populations and local and regional stakeholders;



information and dissemination of results to the media;



participation in scientific meetings.



Online information about the project.

Participatory workshops will be conducted, with the participation of local and regional stakeholders that will address issues related with the difficulties and opportunities they face in each area, contributing to a more efficient management of the project’s regions of intervention. These meetings will also contribute to strengthen the relations between the local stakeholders involved. The results of these meetings will be later analyzed and presented in a report that shall be validated by the participants before becoming publicly available. These actions also include workshops targeted at nature conservation technicians, local stakeholders technicians from associations for local development and civil servants from local and regional authorities.

Specific workshops will focus on biodiversity related with the grazing land and cultivation improvements with the participation of farmers, hunters, livestock farmers and encouraging their use after the end of the project and also on the marine biodiversity and fishery. One of these workshops will focus on the construction of artificial reefs and will have the participation of experts in this field.

More particular, the following info material will be produced:.

A layman’s report (the project leaflet), in paper and electronic format and a poster, at the end of the project presented in Greek and English language, in 5 to 10 pages long and present the project, its objectives, its actions and its results to a general public and to the island visitors.

The leaflet will provide information on the project, the value of the local biodiversity, the conservation problems of it’s special elements, the importance of the preservation of the local character and traditional activities. Overall, 60.000 leaflets will be produced and distributed and 10.000 posters.

A guidance document for the LIFE SMIsLE BIO project in Greek and English. Overall, 1.000 copies will be produced and distributed to authorities.

Guidance documents for a) agricultural and pastoral environmental management plans; b) coastal and marine management; c) sustainable fishery practices; d) sustainable tourism for Small Islands linking biodiversity with entrepreneurship; A paper album for the biodiversity of the islands (10.000 copies) and a 16 pages leaflet and a poster on bird-biodiversity tourism .The leaflet will contain information on the important habitats , detailed map with the sites of interest and species-to-see for every season. Overall, 20.000 copies of leaflets and 4.000 posters will be produced and distributed.

An ecotourism guide (200.000 hard copies will be produced;

164

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

A 30 minute video documentary (view cluster) for the project area and the project interventions and three TV spots that will focus on the objectives of the program and will be used by local and national television stations.

Promotional materials will be produced also for shops, workshops, (smart advertising e.g. in paper tablecloths, restaurant etc) "portable educational suitcase".

Installation of Environmental Information signs - Notice boards describing the project (LIFE logo + Natura 2000 logo,). Environmental Information signs will be placed near important areas. These signs will occur one or two of the featured species, their habitat needs and the measures taken to protect and inform visitors and residents of these areas, the need and the ecological value of specific projects.

Information Spots – Stands – Billboards – info kiosk (available information materials and local products) placed in selected locations and of the demonstrations projects and in tourist routes.

Kick off meeting, seminars and public information meetings: Within the framework of this activity, five public events are planned: 1. The opening conference; 2. One Workshop per island (total four) and display campaigns in each island (distribution of promotional material etc); 3. Workshops Supporting in the downtown area e.g. Rhodes, Kos, Kalymnos, Athens, etc islands that have and can play an important role in view of sustainable practices in agriculture, fishery and mainly tourism and of the available local products within sales networks (e.g. supermarkets, gourmet shops, tourist agencies etc); 4. Press conferences in Rhodos and Athens per semester; 5. European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience from other European States of small islands; 6. Production of Documentaries, promotional material and DVD; 7. Actions of advertising promotion of products and services in areas with heavy traffic such as happenings at the center of the island, etc; 8. Two conferences on the project results; 9. Two dissemination seminars.

The events will be directed mainly to the local population, students, media, technicians and professionals, business owners and land, etc.

Meetings and events for the promotion of Natura 2000 Network The activities included in this Action aim at providing information and promoting Natura 2000 Network, the conservation of species present at these areas and Biodiversity value and services, as well as the active involvement of all stakeholders in the project.

The activities will focus on the following target groups: Regional and local government authorities, local people, farmers, livestock keepers, fishers, students of local schools and eco-schools, tourists and local visitors, tour operators, hoteliers, the Tourist Organization, the Unions of agro-tourism enterprises, the relevant NGOs and the media.

For this purpose, meetings will be held with national and regional authorities responsible for the

165

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

management of the areas within Natura 2000 Network. Results and relevant data will be shared with these authorities, so that they can be used for better planning and managing this network. Furthermore, local society will be involved whenever possible â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the participation of different stakeholders is expected to improve local attitudes and perceptions towards Natura 2000 Network, which will contribute for better social acceptance and, therefore, more efficient conservation and management of natural resources within this network.

Best practices exchange activities and results networking with previous LIFE projects (including LIFE III, LIFE+ and/or LIFE projects). Media and events.

The action includes the promotion of the project results in European, National, Regional and Local level through an exchange information network, and through press conferences on national and local media (TV, radio, newspapers and magazines), television and radio interviews, articles and television coverage of the events and of the evolution of the program.

It includes also the Programme inaugural events in the islands of Rhodes and Kos, as well as special events organized with the view of the international day of Biodiversity, the environment day and the world day of wetlands.

The aim of this action is to exchange information activities and also to locate the lack of understanding and appreciation of the value of preservation of selected items from the audience, as well as the strengthening of the wider communication in conservation and management issues in particular: i. Press conferences in Athens per semester. ii. European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience from other European States of small islands. iii. Workshops per island and display campaigns in each island (distribution of promotional material etc) iv. Creation of Documentaries, promotional material and DVD v. Creation report engaging in similar actions of advertising products and services in areas with heavy traffic such as happenings at the center of the island etc.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Raising Public awareness on the value of the biodiversity and ecosystem services is a hot asset of the Project. Through a continuous update of the information produced is possible to stimulate the interest of the public and the relevant social groups ensuring their involvement in the Project implementation and participating in the decision making process. The Project objectives and results have to be presented and explained in a comprehensive way in order to produce added value. The identification of the potential risks, threats and constraints and of the possible valuable solutions will enforce the Project dynamic for a long time period. The training, education and consultation workshops which will be held during the Project implementation shall contribute to increase knowledge and build capacities.

This action is also very useful in the level of the information on relevant EU and national policies and related LIFE project initiatives of the broader islands and coastal communities. This is a way to make an important contribution in the understanding of the complexity of the nature and biodiversity conservation issues. Addressing concrete LIFE messages to the society shall make people more alarmed on the pressures and their impacts and therefore more actives towards policy changes. The end users and the potential beneficiaries shall also be more interested to be involved keeping them well informed about the 166

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

project challenges facilitating to build strong partnership and strategic cooperation.Increased awareness of target groups through wide dissemination of educational and public awareness material on the threats facing the local biodiversity, with multiple positive effects for the species conservation Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) The action directly addresses the issue of low level of public awareness and poor elaboration of nature and biodiversity preservation actions in the islands. Dissemination of the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s results to the scientific, academic and local communities will be an important asset in capacity building and strengthening awareness, exchange of information and experience. This process could face minor constraints providing by small groups representing specific interests and therefore more special approach will be implemented.

Wider possible dissemination of the Project goals and objectives to the World Wide Web audience shall facilitate the opinion made increasing awareness among these specific groups to make them understand better the real purposes and the political and social benefits of this LIFE Project implementation. Local inhabitants, island visitors, tourism associations, local authorities, members of NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and other target groups involved gave a great potential to contribute to the biodiversity conservation but also to influence decisions making. Increasing awareness through dissemination and awareness campaigns and consultation work is the only way to limit social reactions and conflictual situations among specific social groups, such as farmers, livestock keepers, fishers or tourism operators.

Informed on the demonstration projects concrete results through the long period of training and education work will be very useful to improve communication between the different social groups highlighting the benefits (environmental, social and economic) of the conservation issues to the local small islands societies and therefore will be easier to make them more susceptible to widespread Project implementation in the future.

Consequently, it will be demonstrated to all the participants of the regional and local communities that indeed nature conservation and economic activities are related and may be profitable a long term.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Representatives of the project will prepare and make presentations at scientific conferences in Greece as well as abroad during the duration of the project providing information and sensitization of the public regarding the outputs of the project and the value of the biodiversity of the South Aegean Small Islands.

Notice boards describing the project objectives shall be displayed at strategic locations accessible to the public informed about LIFE programme and Natura 2000 network. Through this action important dissemination material will be produces, as we as video documentaries, publicity campaigns diffused via regional and local TV focused on the Project results and benefits to the local societies.

The Project website, which will be linked to the official web-sites of the Local Authorities and of the Beneficiaries establishments, it will be a dynamic web page, using modern technologies and assets in order to be attractive to the target audience. It will be regularly updated on the Project and the biodiversity issues, on Natura 2000 network, habitats and protected species, facilitating the effectiveness of the information exchange among the conservation groups, as well as among members of the LIFE network.

167

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

A description of the project shall be included with the LIFE logo, and the Natura 2000 logo, and full details of its objectives, actions, progress and results should be provided. The web site and a blog site shall be put on line within 6 months after the project start and regularly updated during the project period and shall be maintained on-line during at least 5 years after the project's end. All this information and dissemination material will be available free, via web-site and in the form of Atlas, to local and national authorities, on school libraries and selected visitor centers, offering important documentation, georeferenced image points, universal projection per Island, category of services and products. Promotional materials will also be distributed.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Progress will be measured in relation with: : - Number of leaflets, posters, albums, guidance and other documents which will be produced and distributed based on statistical data and questionnaires addressed to the targets groups; - Impact of the information material to the target groups - Number of the web-site and blog site viewers - Degree of the penetration of publicity spots and documentaries through media - Participation in the Press conferences and in the Local, Regional, National and European meetings and conferences (number of participants) - Participation in the local meetings and training, education and consultation workshops - Number of staff, executives and representatives of stakeholders, farmers, pastoralists, fishermen, owners and employees of tourist companies, etc, involved in the training workshops - Visit of the info spots, stands, billboards What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of this action are estimated in relation of the deliverables as they are described and include: - the personnel costs, - the travel costs - the costs for the production, distribution and mailing of the provided information and public awareness material - the cost for the construction and the placement of the information equipmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s - the costs for the meetings, workshops, local, national and European events and conferences - the Project web-site, the Atlas, the television publicity spots, the video documentaries production, etc.

168

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

F. Project management and monitoring of project progress

169

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.1 Overall project management

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: Tilos Park, as it is the coordinating beneficiary of LIFE SMIsLE BIO project, is responsible for the overall project management. In this task TPA will assist by the CISD, which will "be authorized to ensure the role and the responsibilities of the Project Manager.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Tilos Park Association (TPA), which is the LIFE SMIsLE Bio Project Coordinating Beneficiary, will ensure the overall project management, assigning Citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Inspectorate for Sustainable DevelopmentCISD as the Project Manager. A direct collaboration with the Municipalities involved as Associated Beneficiaries will be ensured in every step of the lifetime period.

CISD is an Non-Profit, Non-Governmental Company, established in October 2012 aiming at safeguarding a high quality environment -Physical, Social and Economic- from any adverse anthropogenic impact, whether occurred or potential. CISD seeks to monitor the way of practice, decision-making and action-taking of all administration levels and to structure and promote rational solutions and strategies through the involvement of independent expert scientists. CISD supports also local authorities, in the regional and local level, to endorse in decision making process concerning projects and action which will be taken, as well as to disseminate good practices concerning policies and action in the field of sustainable energy solutions, integrated waste management, environmental compliance, sustainable planning on urban developments, etc.

The CISD in full awareness that the big gap is the lack of awareness and participation of citizens in decision-making is attempting to strengthen the dynamics of their set, through knowledge and scientific documentation and through public discussions, with a view to formulating realistic action plans that focus on all areas with combined weighting of many actors at different levels often between opposing interests, and interests, in accordance with the time factor.

Selected and evaluated cases and issues, through politics, complaints, contingencies, crisis situations and emerging priorities, taking into account the added value of action in all three pillars of sustainable development. The endeavors of CISD cover all Regions of Greece, while local Teams are organized and soon will be transformed into Local Offices. The 130 registered members of CISD are professionals and academic scientists covering many fields of Environmental, Social, Economy and Engineering fields. A Scientific Committee, consisted by seven academic members, guide and supervise the works made under the CISD thematic committees and working groups.

170

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Responsible person: Pericles Sachinis: Architect Engineer. Diploma in Architecture from the National Technical University of Athens. Additional Education in Operational Research, Feasibility Studies, Forecast and Marketing (Hellenic Association of Operational Research). Numerous Design and Construction Projects for private and condominiums Housing, Hotels, Resort Buildings, Industrial Buildings, Sport Facilities. Several Contest Prizes among which the 1st prize of the International Contest for the development of the 9,000 m2 lot situated at the CBD of Athens. Various Development Projects either as freelancer or Development Department Chief of RE Companies. Feasibility Studies on Special Issues, for individuals and State Organizations. International Projects in Cooperation with KOESTING Co. (Dortmund, Germany), McGraw-Marshall-McMillan (US designers’ company), BASIL Design Co. (US, Greece).

Chief Designer for the Ports’ Master Plans at Pessada, Sami and Poros (Cephalonia) and Naxos (Cyclades). Development Consultant to Major Construction Companies as well as Greek Prefectures and Municipalities. Project Manager for the design and construction of major Development Projects.

Project Manager for two EU SAVE+ programs. Planning of Pathways through “unknown” archaeological sites and/or places of environmental interest, for various Local Authorities (since 1998). ICZM planning for various Local Authorities (since 1997). Project Manager for the Erosion and Environmental Problems Survey of the South Cephalonia Coastline. In charge of the Proposal to the Ministry of Planning and Environment and the European Union regarding the Integrated Management of Cephalonia Coastal Zone (1998). Conceived and Organized the first International Conference for the Integrated Coastal Zones Management in Greece (2000 – Cephalonia. Conceived and Organized the Start-Up of the first Municipalities’ Network around the Ionian Sea for ICZM. Engaged in RES and Energy Efficient Projects as well as in Operationally Integrated Waste Management Projects. Strategic Advisor to the CISD (founder partner).

Staff involved: Margarita Karavasili, D.P.L.G. diploma in Architecture of the National School of Fines Arts (ENBA), UP 6 Paris, France. MSc (DEA) in Regional & Urban Planning and Economic Programmes of the Sorbonne University Paris IV France. MSc (DEA) in Social Phycology of the Superior Social Studies School (ESHESS) in Paris. She was employed in the Ministry of the Environment (1979 – 2007) and she was assigned as the first General Inspector in head of the Hellenic Environmental Inspectorate (2003-2005).

She was Environment Attaché represented Greece in the EU Council (Permanent Delegation the European Union) and President of the EU Council Environment Working Group during the Greek Presidency (2003). She was nominated by the Greek Government as a Special Secretary for the Environment and Energy Inspectorate (2009-2012) in the Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Change. Actually, she is the President of CISD. Dr Charalampos Ververis holds a BSc and a MSc in Environmental Sciences from the UK, and earned his PhD in Environmental Technology at the University of Athens. He has published on general environmental issues and on paper production from non-wood plants. He is teaching at various higher education institutions and has been working on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management issues at the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change for the last 6 years. He has served as a National Focal Point for the Ramsar Convention and has a keen interest in Wetland Conservation and Management. The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible person per actions under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Dr. Thanassis Kizos which will also control the payment requests. The final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

171

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Manolis Geniatakis, Diploma, Dept. of Environmental Engineering of the Technical University of Crete, Greece and Master’s Degree in Environmental Engineering «Environmental and Sanitary Engineering», Dept. of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Crete. Professional Register of the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks, Category 27 «Environmental Impact Assessment Studies », Level Α and Category 13 “Studies of hydraulic works», Level Α. Registered as a Professional Environmental Engineer (Member of the Technical Chamber of Greece No: 97067). Conduction of Environmental Impact Assessment Studies. Professional experience: Conduction of Waste and Wastewater Management Plans. Consulting in the fields of Waste Management, Wastewater Treatment and Reuse, Hydrology and Hydraulic Projects, Energy and Water Saving, Water Management, Environmental Management Systems, Tourism Projects. Practical experience at The National Agricultural Research Foundation (N.AG.RE.F.), regional section of Heraklion Crete – Dept. of Water Management and Environment.

Damianos Kalpakidis: Master degree in ‘Sustainable management of protected areas “(co organized by Aristotelian University, Thessalonica, Patra University and Ioannina University, with general degree 9.4 (excellent) 2/2008, 2years studies. Bachelor Degree Graduate from the “Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Management” (5years studies), University of Ioannina. (2000-2005) with general degree 7,5 (Very Well) 6/2005. Ms-office (ECDL expert), Statistica 7.0, Gis-Arc view Degree planning for environmental impacts assessments. Ministry for the environment physical planning and public works.(Registration number 21709). Degree in health and safety (HSE) for self-employed and small industry, 11/2010. Member of ΙΕΜΑ (Institute of environmental management and assessment UK.) RN 0029825 Irene Pavlaki: Social and Political Sciences in the Panteion University of, Athens. BA in Sociology and Social Sciences. Consultant of the regional governor of South Aegean for issues related to communications and SME's and Publisher and Political editor at the local newspaper “Proodos”-Base Rhodes. Publisher, Editor and General Administrator of news website www.grafida.net-Base Rhodes.

Chief Editor- presenter of the main news bulletin, political talk show producer and political analyst at the local TV channel “KOSMOS TV”- Base Rhodes. Chief Editor- presenter of the main news bulletin at he local TV channels: “Omega TV” and “Rodos Channel” - Base Rhodes. Political Editor at the local newspapers: “Kathimerini Dodecanisou” and “Dimokratiki”- Base Rhodes. Radio producer of political and informative broadcasts at the radio stations: Aegean Antenna (1991 - 2000), Fm12 (2000 – 2002, 2008 - 2010) Alpha News Dodecanese (2002 - 2006, 2010 - 2013), Radio KOSMOS (2013 - 2014).

Reporting duties: The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the Project Manager - CISD under the supervision of Tilos Park Association (TPA), which will also control the payment requests.

Audit: Where required, an independent auditor nominated by the coordinating beneficiary (TPA) will verify the financial statements provided to the Contracting Authority in the final project report. This audit shall not only verify the respect of national legislation and accounting rules but shall also certify that all costs incurred respect the General Conditions of the Model LIFE Grant Agreement. The costs for the audit is indicated under the budget item “Other costs” in the project financial forms.

172

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) The Project, focused on nature, biodiversity and ecosystems, integrating sectoral policies faces ecosystem and human management, both remaining ambiguous and controversial. The same happens in the sectoral issues, developing by this Project. These assertions are important to understanding much of the conflict surrounding ecosystem management. Therefore the Project needs a rigid management to overcome obstacles and create a favorable climate optimizing collaboration, partnership and intersections between the stakeholders (individuals or groups of people) who will be affected by environmental decisions and actions, but they also may have power to influence the outcomes of environmental decisions relating to ecosystem management.

The complex nature of decisions made in ecosystem management requires stakeholder active participation in involvement from a diversity of knowledge, perceptions and values of nature and basically different interests in ecosystem services. This means effective management of ecosystems requires a negotiation process that develops mutual trust in issues of common interest with the objective of creating mutually beneficial partnerships. And furthermore, this demands effect management of individuals and collectivities enabling efficiency and productivity.

Identifying uncertainties in the management of ecosystems while using hypothesis testing to further understand the system it is clear that a broader management could be achieved influencing all partners to do their best. In this regard, adaptive management encourages learning from the outcomes of previously implemented actions, measures and policies on ecosystem services value and its functionality and then implement different management techniques to improve the results. Evaluation and regular assessments could define any regressions or improvements in functionality of the whole system, Further analysis will allow for modification until it successfully meets the Project objectives.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Adaptive management could have a mixed success in the field of ecosystem management if ecosystem managers does not be equipped with the decision-making skills needed to undertake an adaptive management methodology. Additionally, economic, social and political priorities can interfere with adaptive management decisions. For this reason, adaptive management should be a social process as well as scientific, focusing on institutional strategies while implementing experimental management techniques. On the other hand, natural resource and ecosystem services management where there is a deal between particular resource for human use and the whole ecosystem the main objective is to reinforce management process.

This is a way of sustaining the present and the future appointing partners to balance natural resources exploitation and conservation over long-term timeframe. The balanced relationship of each resource in an ecosystem is subject to change at different spatial and temporal scales. Dimensions such as, watersheds, soils, flora and fauna, need to be considered individually and on a landscape level as a variety of natural resources are utilized for food, medicine, energy and shelter.

The challenge is to provide a strategic management encouraging the establishment of goals that will benefit the ecosystem while keeping socioeconomic and politically relevant issues in mind. Strategic management differs from other types of ecosystem management because it keeps stakeholders involved and relies on their input to develop the best management strategy for an ecosystem. Similarly to other modes of ecosystem management, this method places a high level of importance on evaluating and reviewing any changes, progress or negative impacts and prioritizes flexibility in adapting management protocols as a result of new information.

173

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This key action shall ensure efficacy in the whole the Project implementation process providing, in the same time, sustainability patterns. Sustainable community development requires recognition of the relationship between environment, economics and social instruments within the community. The proposed management approach will influence the creation of sustainable community policies and practices also emphasizing the connection and confluence of those elements. Looking into the cultural mechanisms which contribute to a community value system often highlights the parallel to adaptive management practices, with an emphasis on feedback learning, and its treatment of uncertainty and unpredictability.

This will be the result of the public participation and of the indigenous knowledge and historical decisions made by the local societies. By applying this management approach for the Project implementation community's development shall be also resulted building sustainable patterns and practices. This approach requires, and facilitates, the social and economic aspects integration using flexible and open mind participatory schemes and institutions at a multi-level governance systems that shall be developed allowing for learning and increase adaptive capacity without foreclosing future development options. In this way the goal of the selected management strategy and methodology shall be very useful not only during the Project lifetime but also for the future of the islands societies to be guided by sustainable management principals based on the active learning, discussing, cooperating and deciding in the profit of short and long terms benefits.

These methods â&#x20AC;&#x153;learning to manage by managing to learnâ&#x20AC;? will be at the core of a sustainable business strategy. However, ensuring the effectiveness of the Project implementation it will be also ensured the active participation of the target groups and mainly of the businesses sector in pursuing furthermore sustainability strategies.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) There are a number of scientific and social processes which will be used in order to measure the progress made under this action. Some vital components of assess the effectiveness of the management scheme include: 1. Level of the internal working groups collaboration linked to the appropriate temporal and spatial scales; 2. Level of the external dynamics providing through the adaptive management process; 3. Assess of the cross-issues developments and of the stakeholders participation potential; 4. Provide data and statistics on the efficacy of the computer models builder to synthesize an embodied ecological consensus; 5. Assessment of the embodied ecological consensus to evaluate strategic alternatives; 6. Efficacy of the communication issues of alternatives to political arena for negotiation of a selection The achievement of these objectives will be provided by the selected open management process, maintaining political, scientific and social openness. Furthermore, assessments will be provided concerning the possible development of new institutions and institutional strategies in balance with scientific hypothesis and experimental frameworks.

Indicators could be created on the effectiveness of the management scheme, depending on how

174

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

consultation, works, implementation and learning takes place and on how sustainable values and practices influence and improve decision outcomes, as measured by the specified utility function. On the other hand, indicators could assess the management scheme in relation with the incorporating learning as part of the objective function. In both cases, as new knowledge and concrete results will be gained, the models will be updated and optimal management strategies are derived accordingly. Thus, while learning occurs in both cases, it is treated differently. Often, deriving actively adaptive policies is technically very difficult, which prevents it being more commonly applied.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the payment of the personnel involved in each action and subaction, the travel costs, the meetings and the workshops costs, as this is indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

175

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.2 University of the Aegean Project Actions management Beneficiary responsible for implementation: UAegean Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The three Department of the University of the Aegean will collaborate in order to ensure an efficiant comanagement of the concrete actions for which they are responsible.

SUB-ACTIONS F.2.1. Department of Geography Project Actions A1, C.1, D.1, E.1. Management.

Responsible person: Dr. Thanasis Kizos: Associate Professor of Rural Geography in the Department of Geography. He comes from an agricultural sciences bachelor degree and holds a PhD on Environmental Policy and Planning. He has published on agricultural landscape change and farming systems, islands and insularity, analysis of cultural landscape change, ecosystem services assessment, temperate and Mediterranean agroforestry systems, and human-environment relations.

Staff involved: Professor Ioannis Chajigeorgiou and Post-Doctoral or PhD students and tow (2) BSc or MSc associates At the center of geographical studies lie the analysis, understanding and interpretation of the distribution and differentiation of the biophysical and social characteristics of space as well as the relationship between the natural environment, economy and society. By analyzing and interpreting the spatial problems, Geography is in the best position to articulate proposals regarding their resolution. Without becoming a substitute the spatial planning sciences â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Urban Planning, regional Planning and Regional Science â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the geographical analysis provides the indispensable basis for the development of planned interventions in space such as urban, regional and rural plans and development programs, social, economic, rural and environmental policy, infrastructure works, and works for the protection and improvement of the natural and the manmade environment.

Reporting duties: The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible person per actions under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Dr. Thanassis Kizos which will also control the payment requests. The final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

176

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

F.2.2. Department of Marine Sciences Project Actions A.3., C.4, D.3. E.3.

The Department of Marine Sciences conducts research in various subjects related to the marine environment, including climate change, ecosystem functioning and health, fisheries, aquaculture and marine resources, as well as issues concerning the coastal zone, such as erosion and pollution, as well as on Marine Environmental Quality, Ecosystem Management and Sustainable Fisheries.

Responsible person: Dr Thomas Hasiotis: Assistant Professor in the Dept. of Marine Sciences. He holds a BSc in Geology and a PhD in Marine Geology. He has published many papers on marine geology and marine sedimentology and he is coordinator of scientific projects financed by the public and private sectors.

Project management Staff involved: Dr Antonis F. Velegrakis: Professor of Marine and Coastal Geology in the Dept. of Marine Sciences.

He holds a BSc in Geology and a PhD in Oceanography. He has published many papers on marine geology, coastal and sediment dynamics and he is coordinator of projects co-financed by the European Union and Greek national funds.

Ourania Tzoraki, Assistant Professor, Isavela Monioudi, PhD, Antonis Chatzipavlis, MSc, Evaggelia Manoutsopoulou, MSc, and Bs or Ms student and PhD or Post Doc Reporting duties: The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible person under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Dr. Thomas Hasiotis which will also control the payment requests. The final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

F.2.3. Department of the Environment / Laboratory of Local and Island Development Project Actions A.4, C.5, D.4, E.4.

The Department of Environmental Studies has already succeeded in gaining recognition both in Greece and internationally as an institution for research excellence. This is greatly owing to the dedication, expertise and active involvement of its scientific staff in research projects and studies related to island territories. The research interests of its academic staff cover a wide range of areas: human ecology, environmental engineering, ecosystem's management, thus covering all four Department Sections.

The Laboratory for Local and Islands' Development since 1996 has the mission to carry out research on

177

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

all island-related issues focusing on the Greek island regions - in collaboration with the scientific and policy-making communities, both Greek and international. The Lab's operational platform rests on the assumption that the geographic factors of insularity are not to be apriori considered as disadvantages in the context of their economic and social competitivity. The competititivity value of the majority of those factors is varying in correlation to historical and technological factors. A logical implication of this theoretical assumption is the fact that the Lab focuses on insular comparative advantages rather than coping with insular disadvantages and discrepancies. The Laboratory pursues its mission and objectives through Teaching and Training, Research Activity, Scientific papers and other publications, the INSULDATA database system, the organisation of the Island Observatory and the organisation and support provided to the The Island Forum.

Responsible person: Dr. Ioannis SPILANIS: Assistant Professor of Social and Humanitarian Sciences at the Department of Environmental Studies, in the Laboratory of Local and Island Development of the Department of the Environment - University of the Aegean. He holds a PhD from University of Grenoble, France. His research interests includes issues of peripheral economic development, spatial planning, development and planning of insular ecosystems, sustainable development and tourism planning. He has published more than 60 papers in international scientific journals and conferences.

Project management staff One (1) Post-doctoral or PhD student and two (2) BSc or MSc students Management and reporting duties The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible person under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Dr. Ioannis Spilanis, which will also control the payment requests. The final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This specific management action makes a link three Department of the University of the Aegean aiming at ensuring an efficiant co-management due to the intersected issues between.

The objectives of the Department of Geography actions A1, C.1, E.1. concerns "Grazing land improvement and demonstration projects for the production of high quality agricultural and livestock products, while protecting and enhancing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; restoring biodiversity and conserving local resources" focusing on the sustainable use and management of the natural resources through pilot-demonstration projects, which will be implemented in each island providing benefit for the local economy and the sustainable development. This is a critical action for the re-orientation of the agro pastoral model not only at the islands involved, but also at the South Aegean Region directly related with the biodiversity consrvation concerns.

These actions are linked to the Department of Marine Sciences Project Actions A.3., C.4, E.3 which are focused on the "Conservation and Enhancement of the Coastal Biodiversity and natural flood prevention" by protecting small wetland and sand dunes on the Island of Tilos and as natural flood prevention and natural formations implementing demonstration interventions.

178

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

The objectives of the Department of the Environment Project Actions A.4, C.5, E.4. aiming at developing a Biodiversity-based Tourism Product, integrated Biodiversity, Rural, Coastal and Marine issues, are quite well linked with the above mentionned actions. They will provide important changes to the tourism practices initiating activities based on nature, landscape, geology, agriculture, coastak. marine and fishery. The establishment of Ecotourism network (gastronomy, local products, thermal-spa tourism, diving, etc). The experience in land nature and coastal ecosystems will be important in order to enhance the conservation of significant land, coastal and marine ecosystems and associated biodiversity.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is proposed in order to avoid in time eventual difficulties which could be appeared resulting through the implementation of the Project concrete actions C1, C4 and C5 concerning: (a) agri-pastoral environmental practices; (b) coastal wetlands and sand dune ecosystems biodiversity conservation; (c) sustainable tourism practices.

The changes in the current development model that these action shall provide it is possible to create negative reactions by specific social groups (mainly farmers, livestock keepers, tourism travel agencies and tour operators, etc.) and in the same time, management difficulties and problems could be appeared. On the other hand, the effort to involve different social groups in such a complicate project may cause delays or disagreements. To this end, it was considered that this kind of collaboration is absolutely necessary in order to facilitate the Project actions implementation. Extensive discussions with all parties involved can always resolve many issues. Furthermore, this co-management scheme is considered to be very effective for scientific reasons in order to cross check the data provided by the monitoring and the assessment of the actions results.

The three departments of the University of the Aegean involved will also ensure the quality of the consultation workshops, the public active participation, the quality of the training and education workshop as well as the respect of the setting timetables and the quality of the documents and the reports to be delivered. This king of a collective responsibility and cooperation shall also highlight the level of competence and commitments made between the partners and the local communities.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The type of the proposed collaboration in co-management issues shall provide important benefits to the Project actions implementation, as we as to the quality of the results. This co-management scheme will be very effective for scientific reasons in cross checking the data provided by the monitoring and the assessment of the actions results and in the same time ensuring a high quality of the consultation workshops, the public active participation, the training and education workshop. etc. Furthermore it could ensure the respect of the setting timetables and the quality of the documents and the reports to be delivered. This collective responsibility and cooperation shall also highlight the level of the scientific and educations competencies of the partners while ensuring their commitments made under this Project with other Project partners and the local communities.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) There are a number of scientific and social processes which will be used in order to measure the progress made under this action. Some vital components of assess the effectiveness of the

179

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

management scheme include: 1. Level of the internal working groups collaboration linked to the appropriate temporal and spatial scales; 2. Level of the external dynamics providing through the adaptive management process; 3. Assess of the cross-issues developments and of the stakeholders participation potential; 4. Provide data and statistics on the efficacy of the computer models builder to synthesise an embodied ecological consensus; 5. Assessment of the embodied ecological consensus to evaluate strategic alternatives; 6. Efficacy of the communication issues of alternatives to political arena for negotiation of a selection The achievement of these objectives will be provided by the selected open management process, maintaining political, scientific and social openness. Furthermore, assessments will be provided concerning the possible development of new institutions and institutional strategies in balance with scientific hypothesis and experimental frameworks.

Indicators could be created on the effectiveness of the management scheme, depending on how consultation, works, implementation and learning takes place and on how sustainable values and practices influence and improve decision outcomes, as measured by the specified utility function. On the other hand, indicators could assess the management scheme in relation with the incorporating learning as part of the objective function. In both cases, as new knowledge and concrete results will be gained, the models will be updated and optimal management strategies are derived accordingly. Thus, while learning occurs in both cases, it is treated differently. Often, deriving actively adaptive policies is technically very difficult, which prevents it being more commonly applied.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the payment of the personnel involved in each action and subaction, the travel costs, the meetings and the workshops costs, as this is indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

180

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.3 Hellenic Centre of Marine Research Project Actions Management

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HCMR Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR) is involved in the project specific actions A.2, C.2, C.3, D.2, E.2. by three Departments, under the supervising of TPA-CISD: (a) The Department of Marine Biology which has a large experience on marine biodiversity research, as it is involved in the design and monitoring of the Greek marine Natura network. (b) The Department of Fisheries which has a large experience in producing scientific knowledge that can be used for the management of living resources of fish and shellfish in the Greek Seas. It evaluates and monitors the status and interactions of fisheries and stock of the fish species that are most important to the fishing industry. (a) The Hydrobiological Station in Rhodes Island which is focusing on field research concerning the resources of the sea and the sea bed as well as the environmental effects of man's use of the sensitive ecosystems of the Eastern Mediterranean.

Responsible person for the overall project management of the above mentioned actions is Mr. Panayotis PANAYOTIDIS: Research Director at the HCMR since 2000, BSc in Natural Sciences (1975) from the University of Thessaloniki (Greece), MSc in Oceanography and PhD in Marine Biology (1980) from the University of Aix-Marseilles (France). During the last 30 years he worked as partner in several marine environment research projects in the research fields of seagrass and algae taxonomy, biology and ecology, benthic communities structure and function, evaluation of eutrophication and water quality status, and rapid environmental assessment and as coordinator of the habitat mapping project in the Greek marine Natura network (2000-2005) and the monitoring Ecological Quality Status in the Greek coastal and transitional water bodies network (2006-2014).

Department of Marine Biology - Project Actions A.2, C.2 Management Responsible person: Andreas SIOULAS is a Research Director at the Hellenic Center for Marine Research since 2000, employed at HCMR since 1984, moved as Director at the Hydrobiological Station of Rhodes since 1989, Marine sedimentology and geochemistry Diploma at the University of Heidelberg, Germany (1980), PhD in the same University (1982). The main fields of research in which A. Sioulas is involved and has published articles include marine sedimentology, geochemistry and oceanographic research (60 publications and 31 technical reports). He is involved in the management of researching

181

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

programs and in educational programs concerning the sensitization of the public and especially of pupils and students on the conversation of the marine environment. He also contributed notably in the organization and in the plan of activities concerning the remodeling of the H.S.R. Staff Giorgos-Angelos Hatiris, Senior Scientist in Marine Geology at the Hydrobiological Station of Rhodes of the Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR) since 2000. He is currently participating in research programs involving acoustic mapping of seafloor’s geological and geoarchaeological features and is coordinating a project aiming to the development of Management Tools for the Integrated Management of the Coastal Zone of Rhodes Island. He is also involved in various research, educational programs and development projects, though contributing to the scientific development and operational improvement of the Hydrobiological Station of Rhodes.

Maria Corsini – Foka, a Marine Biologist and Senior Scientist at the Hellenic Centre for Marine Research-Institute of Oceanography/Hydrobiological Station of Rhodes since 1984. She has developed experience on various aspects of the aquatic environment: a) biology, distribution, environmental and socioeconomic impact of alien species in the Aegean Sea and Eastern Mediterranean, linking to climatic changes, b) biology and distribution of native species (Fish, decapods) in the Hellenic seas and Eastern Mediterranean, c) husbandry of organisms in aquarium systems, d) conservation of endangered marine and freshwater species, e) monitoring of coastal seawater quality.

Reporting duties: The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible persons per actions under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Mr P. Panayiotidis which will also control the payment requests. A final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

Department of Fisheries Project Action C.3. Management Responsible person: Dr. Kapiris Kostas: Senior Researcher of the Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters of HCMR and has a 20 years’ experience in biology, ecology, the dynamics of fish populations and oceanography. He has coordinated various national projects on coastal zone management and feasibility study in deep water through bio-economic model and has participated in many other national and international projects. He has participated in 43 national and international projects, as coordinator or participant. He has participated in the Steering Committee of 7 national or international Symposia/Congresses and organized-coordinated 5 Workshops. Editor and member of the Editorial Board of the journal Mediterranean Marine Science, member of the Editorial Board of the journals: International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture, Scientific World Journal and of the Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, reviewer in many scientific journals.

Staff Dr. Stefanos Kalogirou: Research Assistant in marine ecology and multi-beam systems at the Hydrobiological Station of Rhodes, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research and is currently developing methods for combining habitat mapping with ecology Dr. Stefanos Kalogirou completed his doctoral degree in marine ecology at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden. He has participated in 43 national and international projects, as coordinator or participant. He has participated in the Steering Committee of 7 national or international Symposia/Congresses and organized-coordinated 5 Workshops.

182

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Dr. Christos Maravelias: Director of Research in the Institute of Marine Biological Resources and Inland Waters (IMBRIW) of HCMR. He has supervised numerous research theses and dissertations and published more than 80 publications in peer-reviewed journals, congress proceedings and books. He has a 20 years of high-level hands-on experience with international scientific collaborations through numerous European projects, scientific working groups, data collection/analysis, and evaluation and impact assessment of alternative management strategies in Mediterranean fisheries. He has been the Fisheries Expert of the 7th Framework Programme of the European Commission (EC) in the Directorate General for Research and Technological Development (DG RTD) in Brussels. Since 2000 has been acting as an independent Expert Consultant for the European Commission, DG XIV Fisheries (now MARE) for progress monitoring of approved FP5 and FP6 research programs in the fields of Fisheries Management + Interactions / environment as well as Policy Oriented Research. Furthermore, since 2000 he has been an Evaluator of research projectsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; proposals submitted under FP5, FP6 and FP7 programmes for the European Commission.

Reporting duties: The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible persons per actions under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Mr P. Panayiotidis which will also control the payment requests. A final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This actions is focused on the management of the implementation of the overall project actions A2, C2, C3, D3 and E3, which concerne particularly complicated, inter sectoral and cross cutting issues where a operational management is necessary. Especially, because of the high importance of the initial actions objectives, aiming at responding on the situation of fish stocks caught in the study area, which is mainly unknown, as also fishery production. The collapse of scientific data regarding fishery is the main reason to not allow promoting fisheries management measures based on reliable and valid scientific data.

Traditionally, the management system has been mostly revenue-oriented, ignoring the biological aspects of fisheries management, the fishing rights of the fisherfolk and the biodiversity concerns and the fishery has been over-exploited, leading to stock depletion and catch reduction. In the contrary, this action focuses on the marine biodiversity conservation, the biological management of the fishery and the protection of the interest of the poor fishing community revitalising the fishery activity. To this end, it is important to determinate the quality and the threats to seabird foraging areas and deliver a comprehensive and well-designed management guideline based on scientific data, as an essential tool for the effective management and conservation of seabird foraging grounds on Posidonia beds.

On the other hand, aiming at providing local authorities with the necessary management tools, this action includes, inter alia, the elaboration of a system to co-manage marine environment with fishery producing Plans of Integrated Coastal Zone Management following the Barcelona Convention requirements (after mapping and assessment of the seafloor with emphasis on the habitat types included in the Habitat Directive and the EU Regulation for the Mediterranean Fisheries).

183

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is proposed in order to avoid, in time, eventual difficulties which could be appeared resulting during the period of the project actions implementation.

These two particular actions [A2, C2], C3 + Training E2, concern the promotion of the coastal and marine biodiversity and the co-management of the natural environment with the fisheries in the small islands of South Aegean and specifically (a) the Coastal and Marine biodiversity recording, evaluation and practices; (b) The Marine biodiversity and sustainable fishery: Designation of Marine protected areas non-fishing and alternative professional activities - Demonstration projects; and (c) The Monitoring of the impact of marine biodiversity and overfishing control as compared to the initial situation, objectives and expected results.

As the actions subjects are complimentary under the responsibility of the HCMR it was natural to provide a co-management. The changes in the current development model that these actions aim at providing it is possible to create contradictory or negative reactions quided by specific social groups (mainly fishermen) and management difficulties could be appeared. The involvement of different social groups in such a complicate project may cause delays or disagreements.

It was considered that this kind of collaboration is absolutely necessary in order to facilitate the Project actions implementation. Extensive discussions with all parties involved can always resolve many issues.

Furthermore, this co-management scheme is considered to be very effective for scientific reasons in order to cross check the data provided by the monitoring and the assessment of the actions results.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The type of the proposed collaboration in co-management issues shall provide important benefits to the Project actions implementation, as we as to the quality of the results. This co-management scheme will be very effective for scientific reasons in cross checking the data provided by the monitoring and the assessment of the actions results and in the same time ensuring a high quality of the consultation workshops, the public active participation, the training and education workshop. etc. Furthermore it could ensure the respect of the setting timetables and the quality of the documents and the reports to be delivered. This collective responsibility and cooperation shall also highlight the level of the scientific and educations competencies of the partners while ensuring their commitments made under this Project with other Project partners and the local communities.

Furthermore, in the context of this Action it is expected to pave the path towards a sustainable management of the coastal and marine environment. This will include the recording, mapping and assessing of the marine biodiversity, the designation of new marine protected areas, the impact of exotic species in endemic fish fauna etc., while the implementation of demonstration projects and concrete actions will support sustainable fishing practices, alternative professional activities of anglers, such as fishing tourism, the creation and implementation of artificial reefs, etc.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) There are a number of scientific and social processes which will be used in order to measure the progress made under this action. Some vital components of assess the effectiveness of the management scheme include: 1. Level of the internal working groups collaboration linked to the appropriate temporal and spatial

184

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

scales; 2. Level of the external dynamics providing through the adaptive management process; 3. Assess of the cross-issues developments and of the stakeholders participation potential; 4. Provide data and statistics on the efficacy of the computer models builder to synthesise an embodied ecological consensus; 5. Assessment of the embodied ecological consensus to evaluate strategic alternatives; 6. Efficacy of the communication issues of alternatives to political arena for negotiation of a selection The achievement of these objectives will be provided by the selected open management process, maintaining political, scientific and social openness. Furthermore, assessments will be provided concerning the possible development of new institutions and institutional strategies in balance with scientific hypothesis and experimental frameworks.

Indicators could be created on the effectiveness of the management scheme, depending on how consultation, works, implementation and learning takes place and on how sustainable values and practices influence and improve decision outcomes, as measured by the specified utility function. On the other hand, indicators could assess the management scheme in relation with the incorporating learning as part of the objective function. In both cases, as new knowledge and concrete results will be gained, the models will be updated and optimal management strategies are derived accordingly. Thus, while learning occurs in both cases, it is treated differently. Often, deriving actively adaptive policies is technically very difficult, which prevents it being more commonly applied.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the payment of the personnel involved in each action and subaction, the travel costs, the meetings and the workshops costs, as this is indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

185

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.4 Hellenic Small Islands Network and CISD Project Actions Management

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: HSIN Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: HSIN will cooperate with CISD Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action concerns the management of the monitoring of the public awareness and dissemination action of the overall LIFE project, which will be developed by the Hellenic Small Islands Network (HSIN) having a long experience in management issues. The Greek Network of Small Islands is a civic non profit organization in which the municipalities of all islands with a population of under 5,000 inhabitants are members. It was founded in 2007 and is active all over Greece (North Aegean Sea, South Aegean Sea, Ionian Sea, Saronic Bay, Sporades Islands e.t.c.). Its purpose is to develop human and social resources in order to help the improvement of local business activities and support the small islands in several European projects. HSIN was a member of monitoring committees in the period from 2007 to 2013 in the departments of North Aegean, South Aegean, Ionian, Peloponissos, and Western Greece. It is also a member of the Sea Policy Council which is supervised by the Greek Prime Minister and it's also a member of the ESIN developing a fully collaborated with HSIN over the past 7 years for several projects in the Dodecanese Islands (Chalki, Tilos, Simi, Nisiros). It has implemented several European projects, such as: o Equal : - 1. The creation of a social economy observatory (Nisiros, Chalki, Tilos); - 2. A Study for the planning and the organization of mentoring and e-mentoring in the social economy of the small islands; - 3. A detailed Study of the activities of the enterprises and organizations of the thirdlevel sector in island regions; o IPD: A formation of cooperative business networks in the maritime sector. o E conden plus: Medisolae 3D - Mediterranean Islands 3D Aerial navigation; Telematic installations on Greek small islands. o Smart islands: Smart telematic installations concerning social and economic life on Chalki, on Tilos, and on another 10 Greek islands. o Development: A detailed Report of the regional ports of European Mediterranean countries and proposals for their development. o Society of Information: Development of the infrastructure of Local Access Networks. Promotion of development and demand of wide-ranging infrastructure on 10 small Greek islands; Coordination of conferences and seminars in Chalki, Tilos,Simi.

In this action the HSIN will be assisted by CISD

186

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Overall Action E.5.

Responsible Person: Eleftherios Kechagioglou: President of the Hellenic Small Islands Network’s Board of Directors and has managed and been involved in all HSIN’s projects. Graduated from the Merchant Marine Academy in 1983 and concluded his career as ship inspector in 1994. Worked in an island municipality’s development company for 14 years and is the cofounder of the Hellenic Association of Club and Centers of UNESCO as well as the Center of UNESCO Piraius and Islands. In 2077 worked in the European Parliament on DG REGIO with emphasis on islands. In 2007 founds the Hellenic Small Islands Network and becomes a member of the European Small Islands Federation,and with collaboration with the European Parliament acts on the subsidiary support of small islands on matters concerning the European Union and National Politics. In his capacity as Chairman of the HSIN participates in the National Council of Islander Policy,in committees of follow-up of Financing Tools of the regions of North and South Aegean,Ionion,Peloponnesus and Western Greece. He has succeeded in creating support measures for Greek islands, the participation of the HSIN in the participatory consultation process of EU and the creation of projects in the islands.

Project management HSIN Staff involved: Konstantinos Kostellos: is a coordinator in HSIN for national and European programs with expertise in the area of Electronic Design. Coordinates activities and secretarial and administrative support among the project partners and network staff. Has had the position for three years and has implemented programs, which focus on telematics applications and the creation of local bank of operators of small islands. Has knowledge of internet and project planning in the HSIN. Has implemented 14 projects by coordinating small Greek islands and has represented the network in technical meetings with partners abroad. Also supports the Network’s department on conferences and PR events.

Alexandros Vasilakos: Graduated from the Leica Academy in Athens and has been working on the Smart Islands project for the past 2 years,covering 14 islands as the on-site photographer,technical advisor and data curator. Has experience in sales,knowledge of computers,image editing software,touch applications and the internet, and is efficient in artistic and commercial photo shoots as well as nature,portrait and art photography. Has participated in HSIN’s projects and project meetings on both local and european level and has captured the photos and footage used for press releases.

Project management CISD staff involved: Eleni Myrivili is today holding the position of Assistant Professor at the University of the Aegean Department of Cultural Technology and Communications. Her BA was a double major in sociology and theater (Wesleyan University, C.T. USA) and her MA in Performance Studies (New York University, N.Y., N.Y.) In 2004 she got her PhD in cultural anthropology from Columbia University in N.Y. where she taught for a year as adjunct professor. Her dissertation undertakes the national border as an exceptional institution of power within the modern nation-state. Ever since Ms Myrivili has been teaching courses, writing papers in international journals and chapters in books. She has also designed multimedia museum exhibitions and internet applications, public events, and hosted 13 hourly episodes on public television on issues of sustainability. She has been an active member of several CSOs such as “Citizens Initiative for Sustainable Development” (http://www.cisd.gr), “Society of the Environment and Cultural Heritage” (http://en.ellet.gr ), “Dafne-Defne” (Greek-Turkish second tier diplomacy),

187

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

“Mediterranean SOS Network,” and others. This year she was elected to the City Council of Athens.

Irene Pavlaki: Social and Political Sciences in the Panteion University of, Athens. BA in Sociology and Social Sciences. Consultant of the regional governor of South Aegean for issues related to communications and SME's and Publisher and Political editor at the local newspaper “Proodos”-Base Rhodes. Publisher, Editor and General Administrator of news website www.grafida.net-Base Rhodes.

Chief Editor- presenter of the main news bulletin, political talk show producer and political analyst at the local TV channel “KOSMOS TV”- Base Rhodes. Chief Editor- presenter of the main news bulletin at he local TV channels: “Omega TV” and “Rodos Channel” - Base Rhodes. Political Editor at the local newspapers: “Kathimerini Dodecanisou” and “Dimokratiki”- Base Rhodes. Radio producer of political and informative broadcasts at the radio stations: Aegean Antenna (1991 - 2000), Fm12 (2000 – 2002, 2008 - 2010) Alpha News Dodecanese (2002 - 2006, 2010 - 2013), Radio KOSMOS (2013 - 2014) Management and reporting duties The preparation of the progress reports, the midterm and final reports with be developed by the responsible person under the supervision of the overall actions responsible person, Eleftherios Kechagioglou, which will also control the payment requests. The final control will be by the Project Manager (TPA via CISD).

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This action is linked to the project action E5 and concerns the management of the overall Public awareness and Dissemination process. It is very important in order to ensure an operational and efficient organization and timetable concerning the dissemination material, the events, seminars, etc. In every stage of the project implementation is necessary to be alerted assessing the level of the public participation and the quality and the impact of the public awareness campaign in view to develop more and more media and other actions.

The dissemination of the project’s results to the scientific and local community is the important tool to achieve the necessary penetration of the biodiversity and ecosystems services value to the local communities concerns. It is also important to know the efficacy of the consultation and dissemination workshops and event concerning the impact of the demonstration projects implementation, the quality of the information and the expertise ensuring the wider possible penetration of the LIFE project objectives and results in all levels and also in the Web audience. The projection of the project messages, of the documentaries produced and of the other kind of publicity material is expected to increase awareness among the specific target groups. It is however necessary to assess their penetration to the local inhabitants, island visitors, tourism associations, local authorities, members of NGO’s, etc. in order to understand better the potential used by every single partner and target group. If it will be necessary more actions will be undertaken in order to produce an additional added value.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) There is always the possibility to face different kinds of constraints during the implementation of the project, which is based on the public participation and the partnerships, because of the involvement of target groups having different and even contradictory interests. For this reason a continuous update is necessary in order to control the penetration of the measures proposed. It is also necessary to make

188

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

continuous assessment of the quality and the contribution of all the relevant target groups involved in making individual or collective decisions. At the same time a presentation of the evolution of this project actions by the identification of the potential problems will be made in every stage.

The regular assessment of the project dissemination material and of the web-site penetration to the local communities will be very useful in order to face any kind of constraints and maximize the action efficacy. Another step is the regular visits of the local workshops to identify possible problems, as well as of the local shops, cafes, restaurants, travel agencies, local markets and info kiosks in order to identify the potential results, in terms of the number of the daily visitors and the number of the documents distribution. Smart advertising in paper tablecloths, restaurant, etc. which will be produced could support a wider penetration of the public awareness and dissemination actions.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) The action is directly addressed the low level of the existing public awareness on the nature and biodiversity conservation issues. The public awareness and dissemination campaigns of the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s results to the scientific and local communities will be the most important tool to the knowledge and the exchange of information and of experience supported by a coherent participatory scheme concerning the public participation in the decision making process. It is expected to create a good enough potential able to support and promote the project ambitious objectives and to deliver new social and economic dynamics. Wider dissemination of the project objectives and results through the World Wide Web audience can contribute to the dissemination of sustainability messages illustrated by concrete actions and measurable results.

It is expected to provide an increased awareness among young people and the specific target groups, influencing them to move forward towards new priorities and values on the basis of sustainable practices and ecosystem services. Local inhabitants, island visitors, tourism associations, local authorities, members of NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, administrative, etc. are expected to be interested on the project and to participate actively in the whole process, taking into account that each target group has a great potential which has to be expressed in order to contribute to the biodiversity conservation actions implementation and dissemination.

Mobilizing local communities to be involved in the project, informing them on the concrete results and environmental and socio-economic benefits issued by the project, will be the key factor for the success of this LIFE project ensuring the link between biodiversity and business. Consequently, it will demonstrate to the local societies that biodiversity conservation and economic activities are closely related and they can be very profitable for the future of the remote islands of the south Aegean region.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) The progress made under this action will be measured in every stage of the whole process in order to identify the efficacy and the penetration status of the implementing dissemination actions and also the level of the public awareness achieved through the project actions implementation, as well as the particular public affected. A monitoring and assessment system will be developed to assess the management efficacy, which will be in direct relation with the results and the assessments which will be developed under the actions F1, F2, F3 and F4 concerning the effectiveness of the management of the dissemination actions on the project overall results.

There are a number of scientific and social processes which will be used in order to measure the 189

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

progress made under this action. Some vital components of assess the effectiveness of the management scheme include: 1. Level of the internal working groups collaboration linked to the appropriate temporal and spatial scales; 2. Level of the external dynamics providing through the adaptive management process; 3. Assess of the cross-issues developments and of the stakeholders participation potential; 4. Provide data and statistics on the efficacy of the computer models builder to synthesize an embodied ecological consensus; 5. Assessment of the embodied ecological consensus to evaluate strategic alternatives; 6. Efficacy of the communication issues of alternatives to political arena for negotiation of a selection The achievement of these objectives will be provided by the selected open management process, maintaining political, scientific and social openness. Furthermore, assessments will be provided concerning the possible development of new institutions and institutional strategies in balance with scientific hypothesis and experimental frameworks.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the payment of the personnel involved in each action and subaction, the travel costs, the meetings and the workshops costs, as this is indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

190

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.5 After-LIFE Plan

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: TPA will be responsible for the After LIFE Plan, which will be managed by the CISD as nominated by TPA Project Manager. Associated Beneficiaries, such as UAegean, HCMR, HSIN and the Municipalities of Nisyros, Symi and Tilos will contribute in sectoral issues.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) Tilos Park, as it is the coordinating beneficiary of LIFE SMIsLE BIO project, shall produce an “After-LIFE Plan”, as a separate F-action, in order to consolidate the data and results over the project lifetime and will be delivered as a part of the Final Report in Greek and English languages, in paper and electronic format.

This After LIFE Plan shall follow all typical requirements while in the same time will synthesize all the described sectoral issues in one integrated sustainable strategy. It shall set out how the actions initiated in the LIFE project will be continued and developed in the years that follow the end of the project, and how the longer term management of the site(s) / habitats / species will be assured, responding to the follows: 1. Overview of the project history and an assessment of the situation at the end of the project; 2. After-LIFE objectives and meth­odology; 3. The funding needs and the sources of funds; 4. Respect for LIFE and Natura 2000 requirements.

A SWOT analysis shall be used to facilitate an assessment of the current situation and to help identify future aims and objectives (Strengths; Weaknesses; Opportunities; Threats). In addition the After-LIFE plan shall set out how the dissemination and communication of the results will continue after the end of the project and it should give details regarding what actions will be carried out, when, by whom, and using what sources of finance. In this context the After LIFE Plan aiming at identifying the conservation priorities of the sites and the impact of the pilot and demonstration initiatives and actions which will be taken under the project actions, it will provide: (a) the future actions which have to be undertaken (by an assessment provided by the monitoring plan); (b) the capacity needs of the project team; (c) the institutional issues relating to the various institutions that have an impact on the project; Defining policy priorities in order to address the political challenges issued by the environmental conserva­tion.

191

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

A good way of ensuring that the actions which will be taken under this LIFE project could be continued and developed will be the development of a synthetic and integrated Local Biodiversity Strategy which will be able to function as a milestone action during and after-LIFE lifetime.

Producing and delivering a Biodiversity Strategy for S.A. Small Islands is the only way to consolidate the data and results over the project lifetime highlighting the link between the conservation issues and the business-based biodiversity policies.

This strategy shall be based on the synthetic analysis of the Sectoral Local Action Plans, as they shall be issued by the LIFE SMIsLE BIO Project overall actions, which are: A. The co-management of the biodiversity and fishery B. The Integrated Coastal Zone Management C. The Agri- Pastural Environment scheme (AES) D. The Strategic Responsible Tourism Action Plan This Plan shall take into consideration the existing regional programmes and projects in order to identify the strategic goals and the actions which are proposed concerning the sustainable land, coastal and marine environment planning focused on the biodiversity protection in order to further reduce habitat fragmentation, overgrazing, overfishing and unsustainable tourism. In such a way, European and National Biodiversity targets could be achieved in a border area improving the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity and especially by enhancing the benefits of the biodiversity and ecosystem services in local society and economy.

Defining methodology The process of developing a Biodiversity Strategy in a regional and local level involves several distinct elements, which will be taken into consideration. A key element is to increase the awareness of the local community through the development of a participatory planning process established and functioned during the lifetime of the project. Decision shall be taken after information, consultation and debates between regional administration, municipalities, professional, social institutions, NGOS, scientist, Universities, project associated beneficiaries and stakeholders, as they have been identify as target groups in each of this LIFE Project Actions. This methodology shall contribute to consolidate cooperation, partnerships, and Volunteer Agreements on Local Biodiversity Conservation and Quality Pacts between.

Environmental Governance and Public Participation: In order to ensure the widest possible involvement of the community in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan process, it is recommended that individuals and organisations not directly involved in the Working Group be consulted. This should take the form of a general call for submissions on the issues and concerns of the general public in relation to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Consultation could involve placing an advertisement in local newspapers calling for submissions, or holding seminars or workshops with relevant parties. There will also be some individuals and organisations that are not represented on the Biodiversity Working Group whose advice and experience would be of benefit to the process.

Consultation, based on a participatory decision making process shall contribute to deliver:

192

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

1. Quality Pacts, Covenant and Governance; 2. Partnership Volunteers Agreements on Local Biodiversity and Quality Pact and Covenant; 3. Volunteer network; 4. Guidelines.

The steps: i. Establishment, from the first lifetime period, of a competent Local Biodiversity Group setting up a coherent participatory decision making process ii. Consultation of and with individuals, social groups, local stakeholder, public and private organisations and other target groups iii. Analysis and evaluation of the biological diversity resource which will be provided by the overall project outputs. iv. Evaluation and assessment of the impact of the proposed project actions in the biodiversity conservation methods, while ensuring sustainability. v. Identify information gaps vi. Define further measures and actions needed within a specific period of time. vii. Develop effective partnership network viii. Promotion of the LIFE Project achievements linking biodiversity with entrepreneurship ix. Establish data-base on local biological diversity x. Audit of the local biodiversity resource xi. Monitor and review A working group and a Local Biodiversity Protection Group (LBPG) of volunteers (politic, legal, expert, scientific, practical) will be established with a major consultation role (since the first year and during the Project). After lifetime period the LBPG will remain active and will participate in the assessment of the actions, in training and dissemination workshops and after the lifetime period as volunteers.

Monitoring the Local Biodiversity: The starting point is to collate the existing information and data issued by the Project actions forming a data base containing information of relevance to the local area and to the local level increases. Clearly information on designated sites will constitute a significant component of this data-base, which has to focus to generate and make accessible information on the biological diversity of the wider countryside, outside designated sites.

Identify information gaps: The identification of information gaps will emerge from the collation of existing information and the 193

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

biodiversity audit. The Biodiversity Working Group will also need to be aware of any surveys that are currently being undertaken or are planned by other agencies or organisations relevant to their local area. Once information gaps are identified, a concerted effort should be made to ensure that some of these gaps are filled. The filling of these information gaps should comprise some of the key actions in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan.

Identify delivery mechanisms and financial sources: There are likely to be many opportunities for availing of existing financial sources or instruments to achieve biodiversity objectives. Local businesses or local organisations may also wish to sponsor certain actions. The Biodiversity Working Group should identify potential financial resources. It will be the responsibility of the individual partners to pledge their support and commitment for the objectives and actions identified for the conservation of biodiversity at the local level. These proposals will be considered formally by the relevant partner with the production and circulation of the draft Local Biodiversity Action Plan. However, an approximate estimate of how much funding will be required and how that funding will be delivered should be identified before publication of the Local Biodiversity Action Plan.

Consultation on a draft local Biodiversity Action Plans - Agree and publish: At this stage, it may be advisable to produce a draft Action Plan, to set the work done to date in context, to set out clear achievable targets for action over a five-year period, and to galvanise the support of all of the local partners in meeting these targets. A draft of the Local Biodiversity Action Plan may be agreed by the LBPG in order to be presented to the Local Authorities for consideration. It may be advisable to put the draft Action Plan on public display for a given timescale, with an invitation for the general public to make observations. A copy of the draft Plan will be send to the project partners inviting their support and seeking a commitment on how they will contribute to achieving the After LIFE Plan objectives.

The conclusions shall be presented on the Final Report as a coherent Integrated After LIFE Plan aiming at being endorsed by the Local Authorities and published, as one step of a continuous process and in that momentum, participation and commitment must be maintained to ensure the effective implementation of the Plan.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) This â&#x20AC;&#x153;After-LIFE Planâ&#x20AC;? (a separated and basic F-action) is necessary in order to: a. consolidate data and results over the project actions lifetime, while demonstrating the integrated ecosystem-based approach; b. further support sectoral policies, actions and instruments, highlighting, in a rational and equal prospective, the relationship between the three sustainable development dimensions, economy, society and environment; c. disseminate the positive impact occurs to restore the natural environment sustaining the local economy. d. assist Local Authorities to formulate and support concrete proposals

194

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

e. provide policy and actions guidelines that could ensure the continuation of the demonstrations management activities: (a) agri-pastoral by the development of a tailor-made agri-environment scheme (AES); (b) coastal and marine biodiversity conservation by an integrated coastal zone management; (c) eco-tourism network by a Strategic Responsible Tourism Plan. f. relate After LIFE Plan with existing policies of the South Aegean Region Co-Financing Regional Operational Program 2014-2020, and/or with the National Rural Development Plan for the programming period 2014-2020 financing concrete actions; g. consolidate cooperation and partnerships by Volunteer Agreements, Conservation & Quality Pacts, etc.

Conservation projects cost money, and in the absence of LIFE funding other sources of funds will need to be considered. To this end a detailed estimation of the financial requirements, iden足tifying the project major budgetary needs will be provided in order to examine further financing possibilities in order to meet ongoing needs.

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Because of the gaps of knowledge on biodiversity aspects at the regional and local levels it is necessary to fill this building upon the progressive compilation of information and an audit and review of the key habitats and species which are the most important to protect, together with information on historical or current population/extent trends and status and on pressures and threats to biodiversity. Data collection is a priority objective for the elaboration of the Biodiversity Strategy. The identification of information gaps will emerge from the collation of existing information and the biodiversity audit.

The Local Biodiversity Group will be awarded of any surveys that are currently being undertaken or are planned by other agencies or organizations relevant to their local area. Once information gaps are identified, a concerted effort should be made to ensure that some of these gaps could be filled, including data related with the key actions in the Biodiversity Strategy and the Sectoral Local Biodiversity Action Plans. A SWOT analysis shall be used to facilitate the assessment of the current situation and to help identify future aims and objectives.

The financial aspect is another crucial constraint which has to be resolved. Efforts shall be made in order to identify all possible financial mechanisms, tools, co-financers and to define the particular actions which could be financed after LIFE. Volunteers Agreements will be also developed.

Particular processes will be contributed to consolidate the results through: (a) establishment of the groundwork in an early time (b) elaboration of a draft Action Plan, setting the work done to date in context and in clear achievable targets for action over a five-year period (c) galvanization of the support of the local partners in meeting these targets (d) agreement achieved within the Local Biodiversity Protection Group; (e) submission to the Local Authorities for consideration.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This After LIFE Plan will consolidate data and results issued by the overall project actions recognizing the actions and demonstration initiatives and proposing new ones, by identifying the local priorities and the new areas where more actions are needed. It will also support the improvement of biodiversity status by restoring and safeguarding ecosystems, species, genetic diversity and by enhancing biodiversity value and ecosystem services in the local societies and economies.

195

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

This action, directly related with the thematic components of the project, makes the link between proposals providing the basis for further developments promoting biodiversity friendly agri-pastoral, coastal, marine, fishing and tourism activities by reducing their present negative impacts. Addressing the challenge of economic benefits in halting the loss of biodiversity and preserving ecosystem services, thus could provide adequate financial support from alternative new activities; that makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the new social and economic opportunities within the context of biodiversity policies and actions.

Positives results are also expected in the fields of: (a) the social aspects of biodiversity conservation making the link between biodiversity and employment; (b) the value of biodiversity for vulnerable rural people; (c) the dependency and impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services (food production, retail, tourism, bio-tech), their special link to consumers (retail) and to the whole local economy (the financial sector); (d) the benefits of using market-based instruments (MBI) in biodiversity conservation; (e) the creation of market incentives can stimulate private investment in biodiversity conservation, and facilitate economies of scale and efficiencies in delivering biodiversity offsets.

The Sectoral Local Action Plans which will be developed under the project actions will be endorsed by further financing Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) The progress achieved during the whole period of the elaboration of this action will be assessed and monitored, in relation to the regional and local penetration of its objectives, the level of the involvement of the target groups, the respect of the timetables, the success of the management issues, etc.

The Biodiversity Strategy for the South Aegean Small Islands and its various cross-cutting issues (Sectoral Action Plans) will also be assessed, as well as the level of the collaborations and partnerships established. In the same time a monitoring scheme will be assessed the fields of the leverage of the actions at the necessary scale, the ownership, the mainstreaming of biodiversity across sectors of government, society and the economy, the synergies established between regional and local authorities and the target groups stakeholders.

The Biodiversity Strategy and the Actions Plans shall be assessed in an annual basis and progress made with its implementation will be also monitored and reviewed.

The starting point will be the coalition of the existing information and data issued by the Project overall actions in order to create a data base containing information of relevance to the local area and to the local level increases. Clearly information on designated sites will constitute a significant component of this data-base, which has to focus to generate and make accessible information on the biological diversity of the wider countryside, outside designated sites.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated only in relation with the personnel costs, and the travel costs for the extra period time (meetings with the local authorities) as well as with possible expenditures needed for the meetings and the consultation workshops which will be held and organized by the Local Biodiversity Protection Group. The costs are indicated analytically in details in the relative financials forms.

196

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.6 Ensuring continuity of the LIFE Project Demonstration Actions

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: TPA will be assist by the Project Manager (CISD and by the UAegean and HCMR on the base of the results issued by the actions of their responsibility, as we as by HSIN in the field of the consultation process.

Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) This action aims at consolidate the project concrete avtions and to deliver strategies, policies and mechanisms in order to ensure the continuation After LIFE period delivering:

SUB-ACTIONS F.6.1. An Agri-Pastoral Environmental Scheme (AES) to consolidate actions’ A1, C1, D1, E1 results It is very important to ensure the continuing of the agricultural and pastoral actions. To that an agripastoral environment scheme (AES) shall be developed to be considered by the Biodiversity Strategy which will be developed under this AFTER LIFE PLAN. The elaboration of a such Scheme should be Financing or Co-Financing under the Regional Operational Program, or by the National Rural Development Plan for the programming period 2014-2020.

We are confident that the agri-pastoral sustainable activities and practices which will be implemented under the actions A1 and C1 demonstration projects shall be profitable for the participating farms and this will itself be enough motive, although such a scheme will support a broader continuation and a long term participation of more awareness farmers and livestock keepers providing the re-integration of traditional agri-pastural activities in the islands giving the possibility of an extra incomes to small-scale operations such as the ones found on the case study islands.

This particular study shall review the economic characteristics of the ‘biodiversity policy design problem’, before moving to consider a range of policy options, and a series of policy design challenges, which is important to define a classification system by which most policy options for biodiversity conservation on private land can be described in terms of their most important features from an economics viewpoint.

Municipalities could also provide assistance and land for the purposes of the project continuation,

197

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

through mutual commitments without any charge or by leasing land and plots to be used. In Tilos, during a previous Life project, an objective of 2 ha of farmland was set, but the response from farmers was so enthusiastic that more than 70 ha were finally used by the project without extra cost. So the target of 5 ha of farmland to be used for the demonstration stage can be proved to be rather modest and possible more area will finally be devoted to the project without extra cost.

This particular F6 action will also offer more time and possibilities to study in a more detailed way, the alternatives farming financing opportunities and methods, which will be discussed during the implementation of the actions A1 and C1, such as: i.

land purchase clearly related to the objectives of the project

ii. purchase or lease of land as a pilot measure to be examined for future option after the project. iii. leasing at a low monthly cost, allowing farmers to invest their capital in equipment and supplies rather than in land payments, thus making the farm more productive, iv. the ÂŤContract Farming ProgrammesÂť, made by Banks or other organizations to support Agriculture, for a short or long period for a direct payment of the productions to insure the volunteers farmers.

The best option available for the local farmers and livestock keepers shall be the one that offers the most probable long-term protection during the project and after its completion.

By taking the time to prepare a thorough land-use plan for a farm and clarifying such use in the written contract, the conservation land trust can retain enough control to assure that the land is improved instead of degraded or left fallow, and the farmer can be given enough flexibility, independence, and security to make crucial business decisions while farming in a sustainable manner. Calculating the value of the land as farmland will be determined comparable rentals for farmland in the region, as also annual income.

In Summary, by offering long-term, low-cost leases or Contract Farming Programmes, under which ownership of improvements rests with the lessees, conservation land trusts can help ensure that the farmland they preserve remains actively farmed by local resident farmers.

F.6.2. A Strategic Responsible Tourism Plan Providing a medium-long term strategy to achieve sustainable and competitive South Aegean tourism, by implementing eco-tourism and biodiversity paths network, demonstration projects, specific activities and relative guidelines, stakeholders shall built the necessary steps to strengthen the contribution of sustainable tourism practices to facilitate the competitiveness of South Aegean Region as the most attractive tourism destination. Such strategic thematic actions will also incorporate consideration of biodiversity strategies and plans, in line with the project action C5, taking into consideration proposals made by the actions C1, C2, and C3 The vision, the goals and the strategic proposals, issued from this action, will constitute the basis of regional and national strategies or master plans for sustainable development of tourism in relation to biodiversity..

This F project action will provide a Strategic Responsible Tourism Plan for 2014-2020, based on a new model of participatory governance system in the monitoring and implementation as a good instrument for the development of tourism in the region our country.

198

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

First step, is to make commitments between Regional and Local Government and the tourism sector so that visions, strategies, and approaches can be defined in areas such as knowledge, quality and planning, which affect tourism, involving other sectors, both public and private, in the future of tourism. 

Promote a detailed new model of competitiveness that focuses on environmental sustainability factors associated with travel destinations, involving the relationships among all stakeholders in destinations' planning, integrating value-added products to sustain resources while maintaining market position relative to other competitors. The development of future destinations must be guided by effective and efficient management with a focus on sustainable customer base. Thus, destination management should focus on a systematic examination of unique comparative advantages that provide a special long-term appeal to the target travel customer segments.

Therefore, sustaining the longevity of a given destination becomes a function of responding to market demand and competitive challenges. It is critical for future destination development plans to be compatible with market needs and environment integrity for the industry to maintain its economic viability.



Emphasize the importance of quality improvement in tourism using changing scenario of the tourism industry, the economics of reputation and quality decisions for a tourism destination, the ever-increasing expectations from tourists, and the tools for measuring perceived service quality is reviewed, for defining the real meaning of customer satisfaction in tourism.



Improvements in information among consumers, or in the cost base associated with providing high quality, both help to reduce the size of the premium that is needed to sustain quality.



Signed Memorandum of Cooperation with all relevant organizations and stakeholders enhanced cooperation between both private and public organizations to facilitate the development of the project proposals and joint initiatives aimed at reinforcing the role of biodiversity and natural ecosystems for sustainable tourism development.

Regional and National Governments will normally coordinate this process together with local governments (Municipalities of Chalki, Nisyros, Symi, Tilos) and also by communities at community level. Where local and community level vision and goals for tourism and biodiversity have been set, these may be taken into account by governments when preparing the national level vision and goals, for example through workshops at the local level.

Capacity-building activities will be ensured aiming at developing and strengthening the capacities of Regional and Local Governments and all stakeholders to facilitate the effective implementation of this action, and may be necessary at local, national, regional and international levels. Capacity-building activities can be identified through the adaptive management process and can include strengthening human resources and institutional capacities, the transfer of know-how, the development of appropriate facilities, and training in relation to biological diversity and sustainable tourism issues, and in impact assessment and impact management techniques. Such activities should include ensuring that local communities are equipped with the necessary decision-making abilities, skills and knowledge in advance of future tourist in-flows, as well as with relevant capacity and training regarding tourism services and environmental protection.

This action is a fundamental one because of some important guidelines on what is further needed to be done and how (and by whom). This includes adaptive management schemes which will be tested in real-life situations. Monitoring before and during the application of a particular management regime allows its impacts on the system to be assessed.

199

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

F.6.3. An Integrated Coastal Zones Management (this action plan will be issued by the action C3 in order to be considered under the Local Biodiversity Strategy) The whole process of the biodiversity- related project actions involves the vast majority of the regional and local authorities which have to generate wide-ranging programmes of work that directly or indirectly involve conservation.

The Sectoral Action Plans will offer to them useful policy making documentation. Constructive engagement with these processes on the part of non-governmental and government organizations that are concerned with conservation is also a good way of working to make regional government and policy arenas more amenable to and supportive of conservation efforts.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) Acting responsibly in line with the interests of the community is an integral part of the corporate culture within the framework of the Sustainability Strategy, where four topics have been given top priority: the sustainable product range policy and the promotion of the consumption of more sustainable products; resource and climate protection; satisfaction and involvement of employees plus social responsibility.

This F6 action is the synthesisi of the policies and planning proposals issued by the project overall actions (A1, A2, A3, A4, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, D1, D2, D3, D E1, E2, E3, E4,) demonstrating that quality goes much further than the primary properties of the products and also encompasses ecological and social aspects. The aim, therefore, is to develop Sectoral Action Plans that will be made in practice further actions after the lifetime period. The most significant objective is to promote more sustainable consumption on a large scale and offer products with added sustainable value at attractive prices contributing to make the markets understanding the benefits and opportunities for new products and projects through addressing the issue of biodiversity and of sustainability.

Of the many potential supportive policies toward agricultural, livestock, fisheries and tourism sustainability, the following deserve particularly this action.

1) Encouraging resource-use efficiency is the key to lessening the environmental impact of crops and livestock, as well as of overfishing and alien species invasion.

2) Correcting for negative environmental externalities of agriculture and fisheries will reflect the true costs of agricultural and fishery products.

3) Rewarding farmers, livestock keepers and fishers for the provisioning of environmental services will provide incentives to engage in environmentally beneficial practices. Payment schemes for environmental services are also under study.

4) Increasing investments 5) Empowering poor farmers and fishers Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) These implementing conservation activities have to deal with the complexities of the physical environment, of ecosystems, of populations of non-human species and of human society, and with the interactions between all these levels. Any given conservation scenario will almost certainly present a

200

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

unique combination of these. Thus, even if it is possible to obtain a persuasive account of why certain approaches have succeeded or failed, it may be difficult to work out which of these may be widely applicable and which may be products of a particular and unique set of circumstances.

But of course as experience accumulates generalities do emerge and it would be extremely wasteful to ignore all previous activities. Success lies in learning from other experiences without being prescriptive and avoiding a “one size fits all” mentality. A general issue that requires more attention than it has yet received is the opportunity that exists to conserve biodiversity in production landscapes of all kinds.

Given the inexorable expansion and intensification of human activities, this is a crucial issue. Those who fund and manage conservation can contribute to improved practice on the ground by working to create an supportive environment for conservation. Those who implement conservation on the ground are best placed to improve its practice.

Biodiversity and Area-based approaches are widely advocated for planning in species’ conservation, as it is the case of the project objectives. Areas, with large numbers of species, especially endemics, are often referred to as "hotspots", as it is the case of the project area.

It is argued that by concentrating conservation efforts a disproportionate impact can be had on the maintenance efforts. It is widely accepted that such area-based approaches are the only realistic hope of maintaining a significant proportion of the world’s biological diversity, but there are both practical and theoretical difficulties in identifying the most important areas.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) Sectoral Biodiversity Action Plans of the kind of the proposal, is a fundamental requirement of virtually any conservation intervention. These plans are intended to be elaborated and managed by active experimentation and active citizens involvement constructing a model system under consideration generating a series of important outcomes which will be tested in real-life situations.

The produced Action Plans should be endorsed by the Local Authorities in view to be officially accepted and published. It should be emphasized that the publication of the Plans is only one step of a continuous process and that momentum, participation and commitment must be maintained to ensure the effective implementation of the Plans.

The conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity at the local level is an ongoing process, and the initiation of the Local Biodiversity Action Plans process is only the first significant landmark in this process, to be built upon by subsequent Action Plans. The working group should strive to have the Local Biodiversity Action Plan completed within one and at most two years of the establishment of the group. Each Local Biodiversity Action Plan should be for a five-year period, and it is imperative that progress with its implementation is monitored and reviewed. The Heritage Officer in consultation with the Working Group and local authority should prepare a short annual report. A full review should be undertaken after three years, with the purpose of assessing progress and effectiveness and making modifications where necessary. This review should also allow the framing of the next Local Biodiversity Action Plan to commence. The annual and mid-term review reports should be presented to the Local Authority and other partners. They should also be available to the public.

The open and honest approach to the sharing of information and experience shall enhance lessonlearning and help build capacity across the entire conservation communities.

201

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) Reporting is one of the most unrewarding and onerous tasks. This action will also be monitored and assessed, particularly in the most complex situations, which most conservation activities are. The major reason for keeping records should be to improve conservation management in the area concerned base on the expertise of the Scientifics and of particular individuals taking into account the need of transmitting this expertise to the local communities and also providing the continuation of the project actions results providing permanent records â&#x20AC;&#x201C; written words, photographs, video or tape-recording â&#x20AC;&#x201C; which can play a vital role.

Documentation in the conservation management activities and in these Sectoral Action Plans is also important in this situations where different interest groups are involved. Sooner or later disputes are almost certain to arise over why a given set of actions has been carried out. The better the decisionmaking process has been documented, the more easily such disputes can be resolved. In this case, documentation should concentrate on what decisions have been made (i.e. actions to be undertaken and designated responsibilities) with brief justification. Concision and clarity are the two most important characteristics of this form of documentation.

As well as improving practice locally, reliable documentation serves many other purposes. In the first instance, it can be used to help disseminate lessons learned elsewhere, spreading knowledge and helping to overcome the barriers to learning from experience. Related to this, it should help in constituency-building and wider advocacy. Narratives of successful conservation action are some of the most powerful communication tools available (although the temptation, as noted elsewhere in this report, may be to present unduly positive versions of what has happened; this is likely to be counterproductive in the long-term).

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs are estimated in relation with the payment of the personnel involved in each action and subaction, the travel costs, the cost of printing the necessary documents, the meetings and the workshops costs, as this is indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

202

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Action title:

F.7 Indicators for the compilation of information needed

Beneficiary responsible for implementation: TPA Responsibilities in case several beneficiaries are implicated: The monitoring through indicators will be elaborated by the University of the Aegean and the ECMR under the coordination of the Project Manager and the supervision and final control of the TPA Description (Maximum Characters: 10000) RECOGNIZING NATURA 2000 BENEFITS AND DEMONSTRATING THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF CONSERVATION MEASURES Even though knowledge about the value of biodiversity, ecosystems and the services they provide is steadily increasing, there is still an apparent lack of quantitative/monetary and well-documented information on the socio-economic benefits associated with protected areas, including Natura 2000, even in Europe.

Existing information in a national or regional level in Greece on the socio-economic significance of Natura 2000 is not yet improved and it is mainly related to benefits arising from direct and indirect employment supported by Natura 2000 sites. In addition, data is available on the socio-economic impacts of cultural ecosystem services, in particular tourism and recreation.

However, there is a clear shortage of well-documented examples demonstrating and, in particular, quantifying the value of other ecosystem services relevant in the context of the network, such as sustainable production of certified products from Natura 2000 sites, role of Natura 2000 areas in purifying water and maintaining healthy populations of species, etc. Many case studies also relate to terrestrial sites as far less information is available on marine protected areas. All this has led to an under appreciation of the value of Natura 2000 in the public, policy and political spheres.

On the base of the project actions objectives, it is essential to build upon specific knowledge and be awarded about the benefits Natura 2000 provides in order to recognize them at an early stage in the formulation of the wide range of policies and projects that they will consider. For this purpose Biodiversity Indicators is a very valuable tool, including special information/working tool for decisionmakers.

Indicators and a set of general recommendations (monitoring and assessment) on measures and approaches will be optimized the economic benefits for Natura 2000 while also fulfilling the primary goal for the favorable conservation of species and habitats in all levels.

This action will produce Indicators for the compilation of the information needed (quantitative and qualitative), which will be prepared under the responsibility of TPA and woll be presented with the first Progress and Final Reports. The indicators shall be developed with the scientific assistance of relevant Associated Beneficiaries, such as (a) the University of the Aegean and (b) he HCMR under the 203

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

coordination of the Project Manager and the supervision and final control of the TPA At the beginning of the project, preparatory works will be done in order to fill the "OUTPUT" tables with all necessary information reflecting the existing situation just before the implementation of the LIFE SMIsLE Bio project. More and new information may be inserted during the lifetime period resulting for the implementation of the project actions.

At the end of a project, the associated beneficiaries will fill the "OUTCOMES" tables, which should then include valuable and efficient data describing the actual results of the measures implemented. This will enable the necessary comparison with the initial situation. Associated beneficiaries shall also fill in the tables foreseen for the component of the programme, corresponding to their project objectives and areas selecting the information which is the most relevant for their project actions.

As the present LIFE Project includes After LIFE Plans an ex ante monitoring is included for habitat, species and the NATURA 2000 network established in the project area, which consists mainly by EU protection status, such as: SPA NATURA 2000 Code: GR-4210026, Code: GR-4210032, Code : GR4210025, Code : GR-4210024 and Corine biotopes.

The indicators will take care of the target Habitat types and Flora species per habitat type and more particular species such as: Bonelli’s eagle, Calonectris diomedea, Puffinus yelkouan, Coracias garrulous, and Emberiza caesia and other, mentionned on the field of the scientific description of the site area (form Ba).

METHODOLY Compilation of the "OUTCOMES" tables Part 1 – Preparatory actions For every preparatory action the number of measures which will be implemented during the project will be described corresponding to the list of species (Directives 'Habitats' and 'Birds') and/or habitats as reported in the Annexes of the Directive 'Habitats', as well as to the number of Natura 2000 sites.

Part 2 – Concrete actions For every kind of the C actions will be indicated the name and number of species and habitats, the number of Natura 2000 sites involved, the surface which these C actions benefitted, not only the surface on which the actions were directly implemented but also the total surface on which the effects of this action are widespread, filling the incurred cost of every action.

Training, Workshops, seminars, and conferences The audit will be completed by the indication of the number of training sessions, both preparatory and those linked to the implementation of concrete measures, carried out during the project, the number of persons trained and the incurred cost for these sessions. Indicate, for every type of action, the number of attendants for each of the suggested categories (Local/Regional, National, EU/International and General public, specialized, very specialized), and the total incurred cost shall also be included.

Media and other dissemination work It shall be also indicated the number of articles, broadcasts, films, etc., produced/published as a result of dissemination and communication actions in the frame of the project, together with the total incurred cost for these actions, as well as with indication of the average number of persons per month who visited the website during the lifetime of the project.

204

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Publications It will indicate the number of different publications for each category and actions involved and the number of copies for each type of publication produced during the lifetime of the project. Furthermore, it will be indicated the languages in which each type of publication is available and the total incurred cost.

This study will use the Biodiversity Information System for Europe (BISE) web portal ( data and information sharing) as well as the guidance documents prepared by the European Commission, in close cooperation with Member States and stakeholders, with regard to the management of Natura 2000 sites and especially to the management of the proposed Marine protected areas (under actions A2, C2, C3).

The large variety of approaches and the considerable amount of experience and best practice will be used in order to build the biodiversity indicators but also to enhancing the exchange of information, experience and good practice on Natura 2000 management.

Finally, it is useful to apply a public-private partnership approach to explore business opportunities for safeguarding biodiversity, responding also to this project objectives. In this framework existing financial mechanisms and tools (loan funding with public subsidies to produce long-term, site and region-specific economic and nature benefits) will be linked with a special focus on the very small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) which could be invested in the islands. It is important to highlight the existing opportunities and constraints faced by SMEs in managing biodiversity in a sustainable way, and at the same time achieving nature and market viability in a win-win situation.

Reason why this action is necessary (Maximum Characters: 2000) A key objective of the EU Biodiversity Strategy is to build on the biodiversity knowledge base and to continue to fill key gaps, including on mapping and assessing ecosystem services in Europe, which will improve our knowledge of the links between biodiversity and climate change, and the role of the soil in delivering key ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration and food supply.

In line with this target is the proposed elaboration of a Regional Biodiversity Strategy for South Aegean Small Islands (action After LIFE Plan), related with sectoral Action Plans which will be produced by the project overall actions. On the other hand, Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services, under target two of the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, this specific action will support the provision of knowledge on ecosystems and their services in the South Aegean integrating biodiversity objectives into sectoral policies, combatting invasive alien species, and helping avert global biodiversity loss, insuring no net loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and setting priorities to restore and promote the use of green infrastructure.

The elaboration of a set of Biodiversity Indicators based on a coherent analytical framework will be a very useful tool for the Region in order to ensure consistent approaches and to promote the implementation of the Biodiversity Strategy. The proposed indicators can be used also in a National level.

This set of indicators providing for monitoring, assessing and reporting on progress in implementing this LIFE project will be improved and streamlined as far as possible with requirements under other environmental legislation, such as the Water Framework Directive. This work includes specific action to improve monitoring and reporting. The establishment of the Marine Natura 2000 network will be a major achievement.

205

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

Constraints and assumptions (Maximum Characters: 2000) Human activities are expected to lead to a variety of stochastic or directional constraints which affect species, either directly or indirectly through their resources. However, there is no theoretical framework for predicting the effects of these complex and diverse constraints on ecological communities. The development of dynamic model which mimics the use of different types of resources by a community of competing species, allows us to study the effects of different environmental constraints (directly affecting the growth rate of cash or have indirect effects on resources) on biodiversity indicators A second theoretical model simulates the behavior of a food web in which individual consumers can adjust their strategy depending on food availability of biotic resources, which we submit to a sensitivity analysis. This analysis allows to identify the most sensitive parameter of a food web, species diversity of primary producers.

A final theoretical model of specialist/generalist interactions provide a general reflection on the definition of resilience at the community level. Resilience is an indicator for estimating the capacity of recovery by an ecological system. It can be estimated by measuring the resistance of a system to various disturbances (or its ability to maintain its equilibrium state despite the initial disturbance) or by measuring the time required for a return to baseline after a temporary disturbance. This resilience is an indicator of mechanistic effects of disturbance on ecological systems suffers from its dependence on the measured parameter to define the system state (species richness, biomass or functional indicators).

That is why I am currently working to develop an integrative indicator of this resilience which introduced the original concept of meta-resilience.

In order to build the set of Biodiversity Indicators, which will be provided under this action, will take care to incorporate all relevant resilience at the community level.

Expected results (quantitative information when possible) (Maximum Characters: 2000) This specific action aims at providing the knowledge base on ecosystems and their services in Europe.

It underpins the achievement of the other targets of the strategy that relate to improving the outcomes of EU nature legislation, integrating biodiversity objectives into sectoral policies, combatting invasive alien species, and helping avert global biodiversity loss), as well as the other actions related to target two (insuring no net loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and setting priorities to restore and promote the use of green infrastructure). Beyond the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, it is also relevant to a number of other EU sectoral policies such as agriculture, maritime affairs and fisheries, and cohesion.

This action corresponds to the key objective of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to build on the biodiversity knowledge base and to continue to fill key gaps, including on mapping and assessing ecosystem services. It will improve knowledge of the links between biodiversity and climate change, and the role of the soil in delivering key ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration and food supply.

Biodiversity indicators will emerges tools and practice developed to assist in the valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services and valuing ecosystem services which will be a potential tool for monitoring environmental impact from natural resource use.

And furthermore work on biodiversity offsets is being spearheaded by: (a) the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program; (b) the banking, creating payment schemes for biodiversity through mechanisms that give nature a value and force the economy; (c) the socio-ecological resilience; (d) the sustainability

206

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C1

assessment to bridge gaps between social and ecological thinking, introducing criteria that ‘talk to’ the need to build and maintain socio-ecological system integrity and finally (e) the making the business case for considering biodiversity; promoting a Green Economy.

Indicators of progress (Maximum Characters: 2000) The progress made under this action will be indicate by reports which will delivered in different stages of the action implementation.

Data Protocols will be distributed concerning the compilation indicators (a) for the information needed; (b) the outcomes issued by the preparatory and the concrete project actions; (c) the monitoring of the project progress and finally (d) the report on the Biodiversity Indicators. A close collaboration will be ensured between involved partners in order to monitor and assess the achievements made under this action and in the same time assessing the resulting data and improvements.

This specific action aiming at providing the knowledge base on ecosystems and their services will underpins the achievement of all the other targets of the project actions, as well as of the Biodiversity Strategy and the Sectoral Action Plans (elaborated under the actions F5 and F6) in order to improve the outcomes, integrating biodiversity objectives into the Sectoral Action Plans. Other actions related to EU Biodiversity Strategy target two will also be into consideration in the assessment of progress.

Beyond the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, progress will be measured and in relation with objectives relevant to a number of other EU sectoral policies such as agriculture, maritime affairs and fisheries, governance and cohesion.

Finally, the proposed framework implies taking into account both the functional and the commodities points of view upon natural ecosystems and by this representing a line of thought which will deserve further research to explore more in detail the conceptual links between biodiversity–ecosystem functioning–services provided.

What methodology did you use for estimating the costs of the main expenditures in this Action?

(Maximum Characters: 2000)

The costs of this action is estimated in relation with the personnel of the UAegean and HCMR which will work on the biodiversity indicators and the personnel costs of TPA and CISD which will work on the action management and consultation process. It is also estimated the travel costs and web infrastructure costs, as they are indicated in details in the relative financials forms.

207

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

DELIVERABLE PRODUCTS OF THE PROJECT Number of the associated action

Deadline

F73 Delivery of Biodiversity Indicators

F7

2019-12-31

F71 Progress Report on the Data Protocols on compilation indicators

F7

2018-01-31

F72 Mid-time Report (assessment of the preparatory & concrete actions)

F7

2018-12-31

C47 Hydrological & Beach Modelling & Vulnerability Assessment for beach retreats due to mean sea level changes & storm surges

C4

2019-12-31

C46 Geo-spatial web-GIS flood forecasting support system for hazard identification

C4

2019-03-29

C43. Clean up demonstration actions on wetlands and sand dunesEradication of invasive species-Fencing of the protected areas

C4

2017-12-31

C41 Registration of coastal zone & potential of flood and erosion of small wetlands & sand dunes

C4

2016-12-31

C42 Impact Assessment & control of flood and erosion potential of small wetlands & sand dunes

C4

2017-06-30

C45 Hydrological modeling on the dynamics of sediment load/yield of small island drainage basins (extreme events)

C4

2019-03-29

C44 Database of spatial & geo-environmental characteristics of the four island beaches

C4

2018-12-31

C48 Predictions of ranges of beach retreats tool for sea level rise scenarios & hydrodynamic, morphological & sedimentological beach characteristics

C4

2019-12-31

C15 Report on demonstration actions per farm with budgets

C1

2018-12-31

C16 Information material-guide for future actions

C1

2018-12-31

C17 Agri-pastoral Environmental Scheme (AES)

C1

2019-06-30

C12 Report on management practices and grazing density limits

C1

2016-12-31

C14 Third year Monitoring Report on Grazing Action

C1

2018-06-30

C13 Second year Monitoring Report on Grazing Action

C1

2017-06-30

C11 First year Monitoring Report on Grazing Action

C1

2016-06-30

C18 Final Report on Grazing Action

C1

2019-06-30

E32 Report on hydrological modeling Training

E3

2019-09-30

E31 Training material on Coastal Wetlands

E3

2017-06-30

Name of the deliverable (max. 200 characters)

208

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

E12 Training and information material on the selected cultivation areas and on the chosen practices

E1

2016-12-31

E11 Educational material on sustaiinable agri-pastural practices and biodiversity issues

E1

2016-01-31

E14 Guidelines on Agri-Pastoral Environemental Management

E1

2018-12-31

E13 Training and information material on the implementation of agripastoral demonstration actions

E1

2017-12-31

E15 Dissemination of best agri-pastoral practices

E1

2019-06-30

C31 Report on the establishment of marine regions with special status & protection management - Revision of Natura 2000 boundaries

C3

2017-12-31

C32 Specification of protected marine areas for fisheries Demonstration Projects

C3

2017-12-31

C35 Report on alternative management scenarios taking into account socio-economic, biological and fishery data

C3

2018-12-31

C39 Report on alternative professional activities - Demonstration project

C3

2019-11-29

C34 Investigation for establishment of construction of artificial reefs in the future

C3

2018-12-31

C310 Report on the development of diving and fishing tourism Demonstration project

C3

2019-12-31

C37 Report on the creation of protected areas from fishery activities Demonstration project

C3

2019-10-31

C33 Specification of invasive alien species impact to biodiversity and fishery-Measures and guidelines

C3

2018-06-30

C36 Report on an application framework of compensatory measures as provided for in Article 6 (4) of D. 92/43/EEC

C3

2019-06-30

C38 Report on Impact Assessment of management measures in local society

C3

2019-10-31

C311 Monitoring report & suitable bio-economic models for marine biodiversity & fishery resources

C3

2020-02-28

D15 Report on the analysis of biodiversity and ecosystem services

D1

2019-03-31

D11 Report on monitoring protocols and regimes on biological, physical & socio-economic standards

D1

2018-06-30

D16 Strategic Environmental Assessment Report

D1

2019-12-31

D14 Report on the synthesis between farmland, coastal, marine and fishery biodiversity monitoring.

D1

2018-12-31

D13 Analysis of tourism impact biodiversity monitoring

D1

2018-12-31

D12 Report on the assessment of the type of post-decision biodiversity

D1

2018-09-30

209

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

monitoring C56 Report on the thermal and geological «Paths» implementation in Nisyros

C5

2018-12-31

C510 Report on the green tourism infrastructure

C5

2019-12-31

C51 Report on an operating system, software & database for accessibility & green infrastructure

C5

2017-06-30

C52 Principles framework for Southern Aegean "Quality" Tourism «Responsible Tourism Declaration» - Quality Certificates

C5

2017-06-30

C58 Report on the preparation of a Strategic Responsible Tourism Action Plan

C5

2019-06-30

C57 Report on the marine, diving, fishing & agrotourism "Paths" demonstration actions in Chalki & Symi

C5

2019-06-30

C59 Assessment of progress by survey of tourists satisfaction and behavior on sample/process/quality control

C5

2019-12-31

C55 Report on restoration of existing paths in Tilos Natura 2000, coastal wetlands & sand dunes

C5

2018-12-31

C511 Monitoring & Assessment of the progress made by survey of tourists satisfaction and behavior

C5

2019-12-31

C53 Report on the eco-tourism network on deomonstration projects and activities

C5

2017-12-31

C54 Mapping of Biodiversity «Paths» between protected areas & tourists attraction points

C5

2017-12-31

A31 Study of coastal wetlands biodiversity and species

A3

2016-06-30

A32 Study of physical characteristics and biodiversity of sand dunes

A3

2016-06-30

F31 Progress Report on Coastal, Marine Biodiversity & Fishery Management

F3

2017-12-31

F33 Final Report on Coastal, Marine Biodiversity & Fishery Management

F3

2019-12-31

F32 Mid-time Report on Coastal, Marine Biodiversity & Fishery Management

F3

2018-12-31

F34 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F3

2019-12-31

F62 Report on a Strategic Responsible Tourism Plan

F6

2018-12-31

F61 Report on the Agri-Pastoral Environment Scheme to consolidate the project actions

F6

2018-12-31

F64 Final Repor: Sectoral Action Plan & After LIFE follow up actions

F6

2019-12-31

F63 Report on the Integrated Coastal Zones Management

F6

2018-12-31

A21 Study of the Marine Coastal Biodiversity in the Natura sites;

A2

2015-12-31

210

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

A12 Description of actions, implementation process, selection of participants

A1

2016-03-31

A11 Baseline study: Geographical characteristics of the areas and cultivation practices

A1

2015-12-31

A13 Report on management plans & plan per farm with budgets

A1

2016-06-30

F22 Mid-time Report on Agri-pastural, coastal wetlands, tourism actions management

F2

2018-12-31

F21 Progress Report on Agri-pastoral, coastal wetlands, tourism actions management

F2

2017-12-31

F23 Final Report on Agri-pastural, coastal wetlands, tourism actions management

F2

2019-12-31

F24 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F2

2019-12-31

E52 Training & Educational material on the project

E5

2016-06-30

E56 Public Awareness Camoaigns - Publicity - audiovisual production

E5

2017-03-31

E57 Progress Report on Public Awarness & Dissemination Campaign

E5

2017-12-31

E59 Mid-time Report on the dissemination impact

E5

2018-12-31

E510 Final Report on the project dissemination impact

E5

2019-12-31

E54 Dissemination material of the project actions

E5

2016-12-31

E51 Project Web-Site - audiovisual and electronical support & Laymanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s report

E5

2015-12-31

E53 Guidance document for the LIFE SMIsLE BIO project

E5

2016-06-30

E55 Paper & CD-ROM album & ATLAS for the biodiversity of the islands

E5

2016-12-31

E58 Ecotourism guide

E5

2018-06-30

F11 First Annual Progress Report

F1

2016-12-31

F12 Second Annual Progress Report

F1

2017-12-31

F14 Fourth & Final Progress Report

F1

2019-12-31

F15 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F1

2019-12-31

F13 Third Annual Progress Report

F1

2018-12-31

E43 Training on tourism-based community & the tourism market

E4

2016-09-30

E44 Dissemination on eco-tourism best practices and the benefits of the demonstration actions

E4

2018-03-31

E41 Training material on biodiversity and the tourism impact

E4

2016-06-30

E42 Training material on sustainable eco-tourism

E4

2016-06-30

E45 Public awareness on Sustainable Community Based Tourism

E4

2018-12-31

211

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

A42 Report on ecotourism linked with gastronomic tourism and quality local products

A4

2016-03-31

A41 Base study "nature tourism â&#x20AC;&#x201C; alternative tourismÂť - Target Market & tools

A4

2015-12-31

C27 Report on demersal fishery resources, landings, fishing effort, fishing capacity

C2

2018-12-31

C23 Mapping and evaluation of the Coastal and Marine Biodiversity

C2

2016-12-31

C29 Report on the study of the socio-economic impact of invasive alien fishes

C2

2018-12-31

C26 Fishery database study of the marine fishery resources & stocks

C2

2017-12-31

C21 Biological sampling protocol and protocol for landings of coastal fishery

C2

2016-03-31

C25 Report of specific catches and sensitive fishery grounds

C2

2016-12-31

C28 Report on socio-economic study of fisheries

C2

2018-12-31

C22 Report on the coastal fishery fleet & fishery practices

C2

2016-06-30

C24 Registration of the non-indigenous fishes

C2

2016-12-31

D26 Monitoring actions related with land management (grazing and cultivation)

D2

2018-12-31

D21 Assessment of the socio-economic impact of the project actions on the local economy

D2

2018-03-31

D25 Monitoring Actions related with marine environment, fisheries and fishing industry

D2

2018-12-31

D24 Monitoring Actions related with eco-tourism

D2

2018-12-31

D27 Final Report on the monitoring scheme of the project actions results

D2

2019-12-31

D23 Monitoring Actions on coastal and marine ecosystems improvement

D2

2018-12-31

D22 Assessment of the socio-economic impact of the project actions on the ecosystem functions

D2

2018-06-30

E27 Coastal, marine & fishery sustainable management Guidelines

E2

2019-06-30

E21 Training material on the coastal & marine biodiversity

E2

2016-06-30

E22 Training material on sustainable fishery practices

E2

2016-06-30

E23 Training material on the ICZM

E2

2016-12-31

E26 Protected marine areas demonstration project report

E2

2019-01-31

E24 Dissemination material on the coastal and marine biodiversity and marine protected areas

E2

2017-12-31

212

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

E25 Dissemination material on the Integrated Coastal Zones Management and sustainable fishery practices

E2

2017-12-31

F41 Progress Report on Training & consultation workshops & Public Awareness

F4

2017-12-31

F42 Mid-term Report on Training & consultation workshops & Public Awareness

F4

2018-12-31

F44 Management scheme for the continuation of the dissemination actions

F4

2019-12-31

F43 Final Report on Training & consultation workshops & Public Awareness

F4

2019-12-31

F54 Sectoral Action Plans: Integrated Coastal Zone Management/AgriPastoral Environment Scheme/Strategic Responsible Tourism

F5

2019-06-30

F52 Mid-time Report: Monitoring Local Biodiversity -Identify Gaps

F5

2018-06-30

F55 Final Report; Local Biodiversity Strategy- Follow up Actions

F5

2019-12-31

F53 Mechanisms and financial sources

F5

2018-12-31

F51 After LIFE Plan Progress Report: LBPG & Participatory planning

F5

2016-06-30

213

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

MILESTONES OF THE PROJECT

Number of the associated action

Deadline

F71 Biodiversity Indicators

F7

2019-12-31

C44 Hydrological & Beach Modelling & Vulnerability Assessment for beach retreats

C4

2019-12-31

C45 Predictions for sea level rise scenarios

C4

2019-12-31

C41 Completion of floods & erosion impact assessment of small wetlands & sand dunes

C4

2017-06-30

C43 Flood forecasting geo-spatial web-GIS for hazard identification

C4

2019-03-29

C42 Assessment of the clean up demonstration actions on wetlands and sand dunes

C4

2017-12-31

C11 Selection of participants for the agri-pastoral implementation actions

C1

2016-06-30

C14 Completion of the Agri-environmental project Implementation

C1

2018-12-31

C15 Completion of the Pastoral-environmental project Implementation

C1

2018-12-31

C13 Market-based mechanisms & financial tools for Grazing Action

C1

2018-06-30

C12 Start of the Agri-pastoral environmental projects implementation

C1

2016-07-01

E31 Start of hydrological modeling Training

E3

2017-07-01

E11 Guidelines on Agri-Pastoral Environemental Management

E1

2018-12-31

E12 Public awerness and dissemination material on best agri-pastoral practices

E1

2019-06-30

C32 Application of compensatory measures as provided for in Article 6 (4) of D. 92/43/EEC

C3

2019-10-31

C31 Completion of the revision of Natura 2000 boundaries

C3

2017-12-31

C35 Completion of the alternative professional activities demonstration project

C3

2019-12-31

C34 Impact Assessment of marine & fishery management

C3

2019-10-31

C33 Completion of protected areas from fishery activities demonstration project

C3

2019-10-31

D11 Analysis of the synthesis between farmaalan, coastal, marine, fishery and tourism biodiversity monitoring

D1

2018-12-31

D12 Analysis of biodiversity and ecosystem services

D1

2019-03-29

Name of the milestone (max. 200 characters)

214

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

D13 Strategic Environmental Assessment Report

D1

2019-12-31

C5 3. Completion of Nisyros thermal-spa & geological «Paths» demonstration actions

C5

2018-12-31

C5 2. Completion of restoration existing "Paths" in Tilos Natura 2000 demonstration project

C5

2018-12-31

D1: Report on accessibility & green infrastructures; D2: Report on the Demonstration Projects Assessment

C5

2018-06-30

C5 1. Completion of the Biodiversity «Paths» between protected areas & tourists attraction points

C5

2017-12-31

C5 4. Report on the marine, diving, fishing and agro tourism "Paths" in Chalki & Symi

C5

2018-12-31

C5 6. Guidelines on a strategic Resonsible Tourism Action Plan

C5

2019-12-31

C5 5. Guidelines on a Green Tourism Infrastructures

C5

2019-06-30

A31 Beach Environmental Database

A3

2016-06-30

F32 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F3

2019-12-31

F31 Final Report on Coastal, Marine Biodiversity & Fishery Management

F3

2019-12-31

F61 Sectoral Action Plan & After LIFE follow up actions

F6

2019-12-31

A21 Review of existing data on Coastal & Marine biodiversity in view of possible new design of Natura sites;

A2

2015-12-31

A11 Report of the monitoring indicators of the grazing preparatory action

A1

2016-06-30

F21 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F2

2019-12-31

F21 Final Report on Agri-pastural, coastal wetlands, tourism actions management

F2

2019-12-31

E52 Layman’s report

E5

2015-12-31

E51 Launch of the Project Web-Site

E5

2015-12-31

E52 Launch of the Public Awareness Campaign

E5

2017-03-31

F11 Final Repport

F1

2019-12-31

F12 Management scheme for the After LIFE Plan

F1

2019-12-31

E41 Eco-tourism Best Practices dissemination

E4

2018-03-31

E42 Public awareness on Sustainable Community Based Tourism

E4

2018-12-31

A41 Report on partnership and commitments made between stakeholders on Quality Certificates and a «Business – Based Biodiversity Good Practices»

A4

2016-06-30

C22 Completion of the coastal fishery fleet, and fishery practices

C2

2016-06-30

215

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 LIFE-SMIsLE-Bio - C2

registration C24 Completion of fishery database srudy, marine fishery resiurces and stocks

C2

2018-12-31

C21 Protocols of production

C2

2016-01-31

C23 Completion of Mapping and evaluation of the coastal & marine biodiversity

C2

2016-12-31

D21 Completion of the socio-economic impact assessment of the project actions

D2

2018-06-30

D22 A monitoring scheme of the project actions results

D2

2019-12-31

E21 Dissemination of coastal - marine biodiversity and marine protected areas

E2

2017-12-31

E22 Public awerness on Integrated Coastal Zone Management and sustainable fishery

E2

2017-12-31

E23 Coastal, marine & fishery sustainable management

E2

2019-06-30

F41 Final Report on Training & consultation workshops & Public Awareness

F4

2019-12-31

F42 Management scheme for the continuation of the dissemination actions

F4

2019-12-31

F51 Monitoring Local Biodiversity -Identify Gaps

F5

2018-06-30

F52 Sectoral Action Plans:

F5

2019-06-30

F53 After LIFE Plan: A Local Biodiversity Strategy- Follow-up Actions

F5

2019-12-31

ACTIVITY REPORTS FORESEEN Type of report

Deadline

PROGRESS REPORT

2016-07-31

MIDTERM REPORT

2017-07-31

PROGRESS REPORT

2018-09-30

FINAL REPORT

2020-01-31

216

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 FINANCIAL APPLICATION FORMS

Part F – financial information

Page 270 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 R1 - Budget

Budget breakdown cost categories

Total cost in €

Eligible Cost in €

% of total eligible costs

1,332,910

53.27 %

2. Travel and subsistence

248,720

9.94 %

3. External assistance

492,800

19.69 %

1. Personnel

4. Durable goods 4.a

Infrastructure

30,000

25,000

1.00 %

4.b

Equipment

18,200

11,000

0.44 %

4.c

Prototype

0

0

0.00 %

5. Land purchase / long-term lease /one-off compensation payments

0

0.00 %

6. Consumables

0

0.00 %

7. Other Costs

248,600

9.93 %

8. Overheads

143,250

5.72 %

2,502,280

100 %

2,514,480

TOTAL

Contribution breakdown Requested EU contribution Coordinating Beneficiary's contribution Associated Beneficiaries' contribution

In € 1,495,762

59.49 %

97,600

3.88 %

921,118

36.63 %

0

0.00 %

2,514,480

100.00 %

Co-financers contribution TOTAL

% of TOTAL

Page 271 of 296

% of total eligible costs 59.78 %

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - R2 - Costs per Action

Cost category in Euro

Project action

1. Personnel

2. Travel

3. External assistance

4.a Infrastructure

4.b Equipment

6.

Consumables

5. Land

7. Other

TOTAL

A1 A.1.Biodiversity related with grazing land improvement for the production of high quality agricultural and livestock products: Baseline studies

9,600

10,860

16,800

0

0

0

0

0

37,260

A2 A.2.Marine Coastal assessment of the Natura sites: review of protection and conservation actions

28,500

4,910

46,500

0

0

0

0

0

79,910

A3 A.3.Coastal wetlands and sand dunes biodiversity relating with floods prevention and climate change: preparing protection and conservation actions and demonstration projects

18,280

8,090

5,500

0

0

0

0

0

31,870

A4 A.4.Tourism impact on biodiversity: preparing an active and responsible community-based tourism

18,000

10,250

26,000

0

0

0

0

0

54,250

C1 C.1.Grazing land improvement and demonstration projects for the production of high quality agricultural and livestock products

19,000

21,750

24,800

0

0

0

0

0

65,550

C2 C.2.Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, State of the Marine Environment recording, mapping, evaluation and practices

75,000

14,800

0

0

0

0

0

44,000

133,800

Page 272 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - R2 - Costs per Action C3 C.3. Marine biodiversity and sustainable fishery: Designation of Marine protected areas non-fishing and alternative professional activities - Demonstration projects

58,200

32,200

124,800

0

12,700

0

0

34,000

261,900

C4 C.4.Conservation and Enhancement of the Coastal Biodiversity and natural flood prevention by Demonstration Project on a small wetland and sand dunes system on the Island of Tilos.

25,520

22,270

18,800

30,000

5,500

0

0

0

102,090

C5 C5. Biodiversity-based Tourism Product Development: Integrated Biodiversity, Rural, Coastal, Marine and Community-based tourism

25,880

19,890

38,000

0

0

0

0

54,000

137,770

D1 D1. Monitoring of the impact of the project actions

110,400

0

65,800

0

0

0

0

0

176,200

0

5,490

0

0

0

0

0

0

5,490

E1 E.1.Information, education, training and consultation workshops on sustainable agriculture and pastoral sustainable practices

58,150

4,470

17,600

0

0

0

0

0

80,220

E2 E.2.Information, education, training workshops on coastal and marine biodiversity and comanagement with the fisheries

70,050

12,030

45,800

0

0

0

0

0

127,880

E3 E.3.Training and education on coastal wetlands and sand dunes ecosystems, related with natural floods prevention and climate change.

48,130

4,470

0

0

0

0

0

0

52,600

D2 D2.Monitoring of the impact of the socio-economic impact of the project actions

Page 273 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - R2 - Costs per Action E4 E.4.Information, training and consultation workshop on sustainable tourism and eco-tourism network establishment

59,550

8,070

24,000

0

0

0

0

0

91,620

E5 E.5.Public awareness and dissemination of the overall project results

107,150

56,130

0

0

0

0

0

116,600

279,880

F1 F.1. Overall project management

309,100

13,040

0

0

0

0

0

0

322,140

F2 F.2.University of the Aegean Project Actions management

17,100

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

17,100

F3 F.3.Hellenic Centre of Marine Research Project Actions Management

16,600

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

16,600

F4 F.4.Hellenic Small Islands Network and CISD Project Actions Management

23,200

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

23,200

F5 F.5. After-LIFE Plan

85,650

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

85,650

F6 F.6. Ensuring continuity of the LIFE Project Demonstration Actions

80,000

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

80,000

Page 274 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - R2 - Costs per Action F7 F.7.Indicators for the compilation of information needed

69,850

0

38,400

0

0

0

0

0

108,250

143,250

Overheads TOTAL

1,332,910

248,720

Page 275 of 296

492,800

30,000

18,200

0

0

248,600

2,514,480

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - FC

Coordinating Beneficiary's contribution Country code

GR

Beneficiary short name

TPA

Total costs of the actions in € (including overheads) 212,500

Beneficiary's own contribution in €

97,600

Amount of EU contribution requested in € 114,900

Associated Beneficiaries' contribution Country code

Beneficiary short name

Total costs of the actions in € (including overheads)

Associated beneficiary's own contribution in €

Amount of EU contribution requested in €

GR

CISD

436,990

174,990

262,000

GR

HCMR

723,500

289,000

434,500

GR

HSIN

253,670

102,000

151,670

GR

NISYROS

92,500

37,000

55,500

GR

SYMI

92,500

37,000

55,500

GR

TILOS

92,500

37,000

55,500

GR

UAegean

610,320

244,128

366,192

TOTAL Associated Beneficiaries

2,301,980

921,118

1,380,862

TOTAL All Beneficiaries

2,514,480

1,018,718

1,495,762

Co-financers contribution Amount of cofinancing in €

Co-financer's name

0

TOTAL

Page 276 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number TPA F1 TPA

F1

TPA

Type of contract Additional staff

Category/Role in the project Employee - Support to the Supervision of the whole project

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 50 600 30,000 85

500

42,500

F1

Permanent staff or Manager - Supervision of the whole project civil servant Additional staff Employee - Secondary Support to the whole project

50

600

30,000

TPA

F1

Additional staff

Employee - Support to the Supervision of the whole project

70

500

35,000

TPA

F5

Additional staff

Employee - Support to the Supervision of the After-Life Plan

50

100

5,000

TPA

F5

Additional staff

Employee - Support to the Supervision of the After-Life Plan

50

100

5,000

TPA

F5

85

150

12,750

TPA

F5

70

150

10,500

TPA

F6

50

25

1,250

TPA

F6

70

100

7,000

TPA

F6

50

25

1,250

TPA

F6

85

100

8,500

TPA

F7

70

50

3,500

TPA

F7

85

50

4,250

TPA

F7

50

30

1,500

UAegean

A1

120

45

5,400

UAegean

A1

70

60

4,200

UAegean

A3

120

40

4,800

UAegean

A3

Permanent staff or Manager - Contribution and supervision to the preparation of the civil servant After-LIFE Plan Additional staff Employee - Contribution and supervision to the preparation of the After-LIFE Plan Additional staff Employee - Support to the Supervision of the preparation of continuity Additional staff Employee - Contribution and supervision to the preparation in Ensuring continuity of the LIFE Project Demonstration Actions Additional staff Employee - Support to the Supervision of the preparation of continuity Permanent staff or Manager - Contribution and supervision to the preparation in civil servant Ensuring continuity of the LIFE Project Demonstration Actions Additional staff Employee - Contribution and supervision to the preparation of the Indicators for the compilation of information needed Permanent staff or Manager - Contribution and supervision to the preparation of the civil servant Indicators for the compilation of information needed Permanent staff or Employee - Support to the Supervision of the preparation of civil servant Indicators Permanent staff or Ass. Professor - Head of action civil servant Permanent staff or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team civil servant Permanent staff or Ass. Professor - Head of action civil servant Additional staff PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

70

42

2,940

Page 277 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number UAegean A3 UAegean

A3

UAegean

A3

UAegean

A4

UAegean

A4

UAegean

C1

UAegean

C1

UAegean

C4

UAegean

C4

UAegean

C4

UAegean

C4

UAegean

Type of contract Category/Role in the project Permanent staff or Ass. Professor - Member of the Scientific Team civil servant Additional staff PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 120 40 4,800 70

42

2,940

Permanent staff or Professor - Scientific assistance civil servant Additional staff PhD student - Member of the Scientific Team

140

20

2,800

70

120

8,400

Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Additional staff

120

80

9,600

70

100

7,000

or Ass. Professor - Head of action

120

100

12,000

or Ass. Professor - Member of the Scientific Team

120

50

6,000

PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

70

50

3,500

120

60

7,200

140

30

4,200

C4

Permanent staff or Ass. Professor - Head of action civil servant Permanent staff or Professor - Scientific assistance civil servant Additional staff PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

70

66

4,620

UAegean

C5

Additional staff

70

164

11,480

UAegean

C5

120

120

14,400

UAegean

D1

70

100

7,000

UAegean

D1

120

80

9,600

UAegean

D1

or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - Tourism

70

100

7,000

UAegean

D1

or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - Wetlands

70

60

4,200

UAegean

D1

Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant

120

80

9,600

or Ass. Professor - Head of action or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

PhD student - Member of the Scientific Team or Ass. Professor - Head of action or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - AgriPastoral or Ass. Professor - Head of action - AgriPastoral

or Ass. Professor - Head of action - Tourism

Page 278 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number UAegean D1 UAegean

D1

UAegean

D1

UAegean

E1

UAegean

E1

UAegean

E3

UAegean

E3

UAegean

E3

UAegean

E4

UAegean

E4

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F2

UAegean

F7

UAegean

F7

UAegean

F7

Type of contract Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Additional staff

Category/Role in the project Ass. Professor - Head of action - Wetlands

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 120 50 6,000

Professor - Scientific assistance - Wetlands

140

20

2,800

Ass. Professor - Member of the Scientific Team - Wetlands

120

60

7,200

Ass. Professor - Head of action

120

80

9,600

70

100

7,000

120

20

2,400

70

22

1,540

120

22

2,640

70

120

8,400

120

80

9,600

or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - Tourism

70

30

2,100

or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - AgriPastoral

70

30

2,100

or Ass. Professor - Head of action - Wetlands

120

30

3,600

or Ass. Professor - Head of action - Agripastoral

120

30

3,600

or Ass. Professor - Head of action - Tourism

120

30

3,600

70

30

2,100

or Ass. Professor - In charge of the Tourism Indicators

120

20

2,400

or Ass. Professor - In charge of the AgriPastoral Indicators

120

20

2,400

70

20

1,400

PhD - Member of the Scientific Team Ass. Professor - Head of action PhD - Member of the Scientific Team

or Ass. Professor - Member of the Scientific Team or PhD student - Member of the Scientific Team or Ass. Professor - Head of action

or PhD - Member of the Scientific Team - Wetlands

PhD student - Contribution to the Wetlands Indicators Page 279 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number UAegean F7 UAegean

F7

UAegean

F7

TILOS

E1

TILOS

E1

TILOS

E2

TILOS

E2

TILOS

E3

TILOS

E3

TILOS

E4

TILOS

E4

TILOS

E5

TILOS

E5

SYMI

E1

SYMI

E1

SYMI

E2

SYMI

E2

SYMI

E3

SYMI

E3

Type of contract Additional staff

Permanent staff or Ass. Professor - In charge of the Wetlands Indicators civil servant Additional staff PhD student - Contribution to the AgriPastoral Indicators

Page 280 of 296

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest €) person-days costs (€) 70 20 1,400

Category/Role in the project PhD Student - Contribution to the Tourism Indicators

Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions

A

120

20

2,400

70

20

1,400

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number SYMI E4

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel Type of contract Category/Role in the project the nearest €) person-days costs (€) Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 50 165 8,250 Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 70 80 5,600 civil servant Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 70 80 5,600 civil servant Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 50 165 8,250 Actions Additional staff Journalist - Press and Communication Management 80 240 19,200

SYMI

E4

SYMI

E5

SYMI

E5

CISD

E5

CISD

F1

CISD

F1

Other pre-existing President - Advisor to the Project Manager staff Additional staff Ass. Professor - Communication Project Management

CISD

F1

Additional staff

CISD

F1

Additional staff

CISD

F1

CISD

F1

Other pre-existing Strategic Advisor - Project Manager staff Additional staff Volunteers' Mobilization Expert - Mobilization Management

CISD

F1

Additional staff

Agricultural Consultant - Agri & Pastoral Project Management

CISD

F1

Additional staff

EU Programs Expert - Advisor to the Project Manager

CISD

F1

Additional staff

CISD

F5

CISD

130

360

46,800

120

140

16,800

PhD Environment - Wetlands Project Management

80

120

9,600

MSc Environment - Fishery Project Management

80

120

9,600

120

360

43,200

80

120

9,600

80

120

9,600

120

140

16,800

MSc Protected Areas Mgmt - Marine Project Management

80

120

9,600

Additional staff

Agricultural Consultant - Contribution to the After-Life Plan

80

40

3,200

F5

Additional staff

EU Programs Expert - Advisor to the Project Manager

120

40

4,800

CISD

F5

Additional staff

MSc Protected Areas Mgmt - Contribution to the After-Life Plan

80

40

3,200

CISD

F5

Additional staff

PhD Environment - Contribution to the After-Life Plan

80

40

3,200

CISD

F5

Additional staff

Ass. Professor - Communication of the After-Life Plan

120

40

4,800

CISD

F5

130

120

15,600

CISD

F5

Other pre-existing President - In charge of the After-Life Plan staff Additional staff MSc Environment - Contribution to the After-Life Plan

80

40

3,200

Page 281 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number CISD F5 CISD

F6

CISD

F6

Additional staff

CISD

F6

CISD

F6

CISD

F6

Other pre-existing President - In charge of the Life Project Continuity staff Other pre-existing Strategic Advisor - Contribution to the Life Project Continuity staff Additional staff Agricultural Consultant - Contribution to the Life Project Continuity

CISD

F6

Additional staff

CISD

F6

Additional staff

MSc Protected Areas Mgmt - Contribution to the Life Project Continuity MSc Environment - Contribution to the Life Project Continuity

CISD

F6

Additional staff

Ass. Professor - Communication of the Life Project Continuity

CISD

F7

Additional staff

CISD

F7

CISD

F7

CISD

F7

CISD

F7

CISD

F7

NISYROS

E1

NISYROS

E1

NISYROS

E2

NISYROS

E2

80

9,600

80

40

3,200

130

120

15,600

120

120

14,400

80

40

3,200

80

40

3,200

80

40

3,200

120

80

9,600

80

40

3,200

120

80

9,600

80

40

3,200

130

80

10,400

80

40

3,200

80

40

3,200

E

70

80

5,600

E

50

165

8,250

E

50

165

8,250

E

70

80

5,600

MSc Protected Areas Mgmt - Contribution to the Preparation of Indicators Other pre-existing Strategic Advisor - Supervision to the Preparation of Indicators staff Additional staff Agricultural Consultant - Contribution to the Preparation of Indicators Other pre-existing President - Contribution to the Preparation of Indicators staff Additional staff MSc Environment - Contribution to the Preparation of Indicators PhD Environment - Contribution to the Preparation of Indicators

Page 282 of 296

AxB

120

PhD Environment - Contribution to the Life Project Continuity

Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Additional staff Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all Actions Permanent staff or Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all civil servant Actions

B

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest €) person-days costs (€) 120 120 14,400

Type of contract Category/Role in the project Other pre-existing Strategic Advisor - Contribution to the After-Life Plan staff Additional staff EU Programs Expert - Advisor to the Project Manager

Other pre-existing staff Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff

A

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number NISYROS E3 NISYROS

E3

Type of contract Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff

NISYROS

E4

Additional staff

NISYROS

E4

NISYROS

E5

NISYROS

E5

Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff

HSIN

E5

HSIN

E5

HSIN

F4

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

A2

HCMR

C2

HCMR

C2

HCMR

C2

Other pre-existing staff Other pre-existing staff Other pre-existing staff Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Additional staff

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel Category/Role in the project the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 70 80 5,600 Actions Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 50 165 8,250 Actions Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 50 165 8,250 Actions Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 70 80 5,600 Actions Staff Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 70 80 5,600 Actions Project Employee - Supporting on the behalf of the Municipality all E 50 165 8,250 Actions Communication Manager - Preparation anf Follow-up of Workshops 80 380 30,400 and Conferences Production Manager - Handling of all kinds of print or electronic 80 200 16,000 publications and material General Manager - Project Management 80 290 23,200 Research Director - Marine Coordinator

150

30

4,500

Senior Scientist - Marine Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

Senior Scientist - Marine Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

Assistant Researcher - Fishery Scientific Team

120

30

3,600

or Research Director - Fishery Scientific Team

140

30

4,200

or Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

30

4,500

or Assistant Researcher - Fishery Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

or Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

60

9,000

or Research Director - Marine Coordinator

150

120

18,000

120

140

16,800

Assistant Researcher - Fishery Scientific Team Page 283 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number HCMR C2 HCMR

C2

HCMR

C3

HCMR

C3

HCMR

C3

HCMR

C3

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

D1

HCMR

E2

HCMR

E2

HCMR

E2

HCMR

E2

HCMR

E2

HCMR

E2

Type of contract Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Additional staff

Category/Role in the project Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 130 120 15,600

Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

120

15,600

Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

60

9,000

Research Director - Member of the Scientific Team

140

120

16,800

Assistant Researcher - Member of the Scientific Team

130

120

15,600

Assistant Researcher - Member of the Scientific Team

120

140

16,800

Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Additional staff

or Assistant Researcher - Member of the Scientific Team

130

60

7,800

or Research Director - Marine Coordinator

150

60

9,000

or Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

60

7,800

or Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

60

9,000

or Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

60

7,800

or Research Director - Member of the Scientific Team

140

60

8,400

120

60

7,200

Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Permanent staff civil servant Additional staff

or Assistant Researcher - Member of the Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

or Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

30

4,500

or Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

or Research Director - Member of the Scientific Team

140

30

4,200

or Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

Assistant Researcher - Fishery Scientific Team

120

30

3,600

Assistant Researcher - Fishery Scientific Team

Page 284 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F1

Direct Personnel costs Calculation =>

Beneficiary Action short name number HCMR E2 HCMR

F3

HCMR

F3

HCMR

F3

HCMR

F3

HCMR

F3

HCMR

F7

HCMR

F7

HCMR

F7

HCMR

F7

Type of contract Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant Permanent staff or civil servant

Category/Role in the project Research Director - Marine Coordinator

A

B

AxB

Daily rate (rounded to Number of Direct personnel the nearest â&#x201A;Ź) person-days costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 150 30 4,500

Research Director - Member of the Scientific Team

140

20

2,800

Research Director - Action Coordinator

150

20

3,000

Senior Scientist - Member of the Scientific Team

130

30

3,900

Research Director - Marine Coordinator

150

20

3,000

Assistant Researcher - Marine Coordinator

130

30

3,900

Research Director - In charge of thw Marine Indicators

150

20

3,000

Research Director - In charge of the Fishery Indicators

150

20

3,000

Senior Scientist - Contribution to the Marine Indicators

130

40

5,200

Senior Scientist - Contribution to the Fishery Indicators

130

40

5,200

TOTAL =>

15,428

1,332,910

Page 285 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F2

Travel and subsistence costs

Destination (From / To)

Outside EU (YES / NO)

Beneficiary short name

Action number

Calculation =>

A

B

A+B

Travel costs (€)

Subsistence costs (€)

Total travel and subsistence costs (€)

Collecton of Data, communication with stakeholders etc - 8 trips/pns - 5days each trip Preparation of protection and conservation actions and demonstration projects - 4trips/pns - 8days each trip Collection of Data and Communication with stakeholders 8trips/pns - 5 days each trip Implementation operations - 14trips/pns - 5days each trip

2,400

4,800

7,200

1,200

3,840

5,040

2,400

4,800

7,200

4,200

8,400

12,600

3,600

14,400

18,000

4,800

9,600

14,400

1,200

1,440

2,640

Purpose of travel/number of trips and persons travelling, duration of trip (in days)

UAegean

A1

Mytilini > Project Area

No

UAegean

A3

Mytilini > Project Area

No

UAegean

A4

Mytilene > Project Area No

UAegean

C1

Mytilene > Project Area No

UAegean

C4

Mytilini > Project Area

UAegean

C5

Mytilene > Project Area No

UAegean

E1

Mytilene > Project Area No

Operations for Clean-Up and Hydrological, Beach Modelling and Vulnerability Assessment - 12trips/pns - 10days each trip Operations for the Development of a Biodiversity-based Tourism Product - 16trips/pns - 5 days each trip Participation to workshops - 4trips/pns - 3days each trip

UAegean

E3

Mytilene > Project Area No

Participation to workshops - 4trips/pns - 3days each trip

1,200

1,440

2,640

UAegean

E4

Mytilene > Project Area No

2,400

3,840

6,240

CISD

A1

Athens>Project Area

No

1,500

2,160

3,660

CISD

A2

Athens>Project Area

No

250

360

610

CISD

A3

Athens>Project Area

No

1,250

1,800

3,050

CISD

A4

Athens>Project Area

No

1,250

1,800

3,050

CISD

C1

Athens>Project Area

No

3,750

5,400

9,150

CISD

C2

Athens>Project Area

No

2,500

3,600

6,100

CISD

C3

Athens>Project Area

No

2,500

3,600

6,100

CISD

C4

Athens>Project Area

No

Participation to workshops - 4trips/pns - 3days each trip 8trips/pns - 4 days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 6 trips/pns - 3days each On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 1 trips/pns - 3days On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 5 trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 5trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 15trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 10trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 10trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 7trips/pns - 3days each trip

1,750

2,520

4,270

No

Page 286 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F2

Travel and subsistence costs

Destination (From / To)

Outside EU (YES / NO)

Beneficiary short name

Action number

Calculation =>

CISD

C5

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

D2

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

E1

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

E2

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

E3

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

E4

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

E5

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

F1

Athens > Brussels

No

CISD

F1

Athens>Project Area

No

CISD

F1

Athens > Brussels

No

HSIN

E5

Project Area > Brussels No

HSIN

E5

Athens > Rhodes, Kos, Santorini

No

HSIN

E5

Project Area > Athens or Thessaloniki

No

HSIN

E5

Athens > Project Area

No

A

B

A+B

Travel costs (€)

Subsistence costs (€)

Total travel and subsistence costs (€)

On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 9trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 9trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 3trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 3trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 3trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 3trips/pns - 3days each trip On site Monitoring, Support and Management of the relevant operations - 6trips/pns - 3days each trip Yearly Follow-up of Project with Contracting Authority 4trips/2pns - Travel Cost/pn = 500 € - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 120€ - Meals Cost/pn/d = 40€ On site Details Management - 4trips/pns - 3days each trip

2,250

3,240

5,490

2,250

3,240

5,490

750

1,080

1,830

750

1,080

1,830

750

1,080

1,830

750

1,080

1,830

1,500

2,160

3,660

4,000

4,480

8,480

1,000

1,440

2,440

Kick-Off Meting - 2pns - Travel Cost/pn = 500 € - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 120€ - Meals Cost/pn/d = 40€ European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience - 10 invited pns / 3days each trip - Travel Cost/pn = 800 € - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 120€ - Meals Cost/pn/d = 40€ 3.Three Workshops in Rhodes, Kos, Santorini / 6 invited pns / 3days each trip - Travel Cost/pn = 250€ - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 80€ - Meals Cost/pn/d = 40€ Participation to Intl Fair for the Project Objectives Dissemination (Athens or Thessaloniki) - Five Invited pns / 3days each trip - Travel Cost/pn = 250€ - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 80€ - MealsCost/pn/d=40€ Four Workshops per island (4x4=16) / 3 invited pns / 3days each trip - Travel Cost/pn = 250€ - Hotel Cost/pn/d = 80€ Meals Cost/pn/d = 40€

1,000

1,120

2,120

8,000

4,000

12,000

4,500

5,760

10,260

1,250

1,600

2,850

12,000

15,360

27,360

Purpose of travel/number of trips and persons travelling, duration of trip (in days)

Page 287 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F2

Travel and subsistence costs

Destination (From / To)

Outside EU (YES / NO)

Beneficiary short name

Action number

Calculation =>

HCMR

A2

Athens > Project Area

No

HCMR

C2

Athens > Project Area

No

HCMR

C3

Athens > Project Area

No

HCMR

E2

Athens > Project Area

No

A

B

A+B

Travel costs (€)

Subsistence costs (€)

Total travel and subsistence costs (€)

Review of protection and conservation actions - 6trips/pns 4days each trip Operations for the implementation of Coastal and Marine biodiversity mapping, evaluation and practices - 6trips/pns 10days each trip Operations for the implementation of Designation of Marine protected areas non-fishing and alternative professional activities - 18trips/pns - 10days each trip Participation to workshops - 10trips/pns - 5days each trip

1,500

2,800

4,300

1,500

7,200

8,700

4,500

21,600

26,100

3,000

7,200

10,200

TOTAL =>

89,400

Purpose of travel/number of trips and persons travelling, duration of trip (in days)

Page 288 of 296

159,320

248,720

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F3

External assistance costs

Beneficiary Action short name number Procedure UAegean A1 Direct Treaty

Description One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action

UAegean

A1

Direct Treaty

One Professor for local scientific works of the Action

4,800

UAegean

A3

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc + One PhD Assistants for local scientific works of the Action

5,500

UAegean

A4

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action

UAegean

C1

Direct Treaty

One Professor for local scientific works of the Action

UAegean

C1

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action

UAegean

C4

Direct Treaty

Two BSc + One MSc + One PhD Assistants for local scientific works of the Action

UAegean

C4

Cleaning up the wetland areas

10,000

UAegean

C5

Assignement to local workers Direct Treaty

Two BSc Assistants for local scientific works of the Action

38,000

UAegean

D1

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action - Wetlands

12,000

UAegean

D1

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action - Tourism

30,000

UAegean

D1

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action - Agripastoral

16,000

UAegean

E1

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc + One PhD Assistants for local scientific works of the Action

17,600

UAegean

E4

Direct Treaty

One BSc + One MSc Assistants for local works of the Action

24,000

HCMR

A2

Direct Treaty

Eight Local Fishermen - Supporting the Fishery Team

42,600

HCMR

A2

Direct Treaty

Assistant Researcher - Support to the Fishery Scientific Team

HCMR

C3

Direct Treaty

Rental of Local Trawls to support the Fishery Research

24,000

HCMR

C3

Direct Treaty

Eight Local Fishermen - Supporting the Fishery Team

85,200

HCMR

C3

Direct Treaty

Assistant Researcher - Support to the Fishery Scientific Team

15,600

HCMR

D1

Direct Treaty

Assistant Researcher - Support to the Fishery Scientific Team

7,800

HCMR

E2

Direct Treaty

Assistant Researcher - Support to the Fishery Scientific Team

3,900

HCMR

E2

Direct Treaty

Eight Local Fishermen - Supporting the Fishery Team

13,100

HCMR

E2

Direct Treaty

28,800

HCMR

F7

Direct Treaty

Two Assistant Researchers - Members of the Monitoring TeamInformation, Education and Training Team Two Assistant Researchers - Contribution to the Preparation of Fishery Indicators

HCMR

F7

Direct Treaty

Two Assistant Researchers - Contribution to the Preparation of Marine Indicators

19,200

Page 289 of 296

Costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 12,000

26,000 6,000 18,800 8,800

3,900

19,200

TOTAL =>

492,800

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F4a

Durable goods: Infrastructure costs

Beneficiary Action short name number Procedure UAegean C4 Assignement to the local contractor

Actual cost Depreciation (â&#x201A;Ź) (eligible cost) (â&#x201A;Ź) 30,000 25,000

Description Wood fencing aroynd the protected wetland area TOTAL =>

Page 291 of 296

30,000

25,000

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F4b

Durable goods: equipment costs

Beneficiary Action short name number Procedure UAegean C4 Direct acquisition from the market HCMR C3 Direct acquisition from the market

Actual cost Depreciation (€) (eligible cost) (€) 5,500 5,000

Description Meteo monitor Various minor equipment to support the Fishery Projects TOTAL =>

Page 292 of 296

12,700

6,000

18,200

11,000

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F7

Other costs

Beneficiary Action short name numbe Procedure TILOS C5 Direct Treaty

Two e-Info Interactive stands

TILOS

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of wood road signs on the pathways

TILOS

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of information boards at important sites

SYMI

C5

Direct Treaty

Two e-Info Interactive stands

SYMI

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of information boards at important sites

SYMI

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of wood road signs on the pathways

4,000

NISYROS

C5

Direct Treaty

Two e-Info Interactive stands

4,000

NISYROS

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of information boards at important sites

NISYROS

C5

Direct Treaty

Construction and installation of wood road signs on the pathways

4,000

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

2,000

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

Hall and equipment cost for the European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience - Printed Material Compensation of 3 invited Speakers at the European Conference on transfer of knowhow and experience Participation to Intl Fair for the Project Objectives Dissemination (Athens or Thessaloniki) - Printed Material Production of Documentaries, promotional material and DVD

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

ATLAS GIS Website connected to the Official Project WebSite - Construction and Maintenance for the whole Project's period Nine Press Conferences (one per Semester) - Cost of Hall and Prinitng Material = 800€/pc Hall and equipment cost for Three Workshops in Rhodes, Kos, Santorini

HSIN

E5

Direct Treaty

Printed Information Material for Four Summer Happenings

Description

Costs (€) 4,000 4,000 10,000 4,000 10,000

10,000

1,500 1,000 34,400

Hall and equipment cost for the European Conference on transfer of know-how and experience Promotional and Advertising Material

1,500

Four Summer Project Promotion Happennings in Rhodes & Kos (Two per island) - years 2 &3 Project WebSite - Construction and Maintenance for the whole Project's period

6,000

Participation to Intl Fair for the Project Objectives Dissemination (Athens or Thessaloniki) - Stand and equipment costs Hall and equipment cost for Four Workshops per island (4x4=16)

Page 293 of 296

6,000

15,000 4,000 16,000 15,000 7,200 3,000 4,000

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F7

Other costs

Beneficiary Action short name numbe Procedure HCMR C2 Direct acquisition from the market HCMR C3 Direct acquisition from the market

Description Fuels etc operational cost of the Research Boat (Carrying the proper scientific equipment) owned by the HCMR for the Marine Mapping Fuels etc operational cost of the Local Trawls supporting the Fishery Research

Costs (â&#x201A;Ź) 44,000

TOTAL =>

248,600

Page 294 of 296

34,000

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - F8

Overheads

Beneficiary short name

Total direct costs of the project in €

Overhead amount (€)

SYMI

87,250

5,250

CISD

408,990

28,000

NISYROS

87,250

5,250

UAegean

574,820

30,000

HSIN

238,670

15,000

HCMR

676,800

40,000

TILOS

87,250

5,250

198,000

14,500

2,359,030

143,250

TPA

Page 295 of 296

LIFE14 NAT/GR/001022 - Attachments

Proposal attachments Included?

Attachment title

Attachment type

37 HCMR - CV Kalogirou

other document

28 CISD - CV Pavlaki brief

other document

31 HCMR - CV Panagiotidis

other document

22 CISD - CV Sachinis brief

other document

21 CISD - CV Karavasili brief

other document

43 UAegean - CV Prof. Hasiotis

other document

13 Tilos-Decision of Municipality Council

other document

23 CISD - CV Myrivili brief

other document

35 HCMR - CV Corsini

other document

41 UAegean - CV Prof. Kizos

other document

44 UAegean - CV Prof. Velegrakis

other document

25 CISD - CV Kalpakidis brief

other document

12 Symi-Decision of Municipality Council

other document

27 CISD - CV Athanasakos

other document

45 UAegean - CV Prof. Tzoraki

other document

36 HCMR - CV Hatiris

other document

26 CISD - CV Geniatakis brief

other document

42 UAegean - CV Prof. Spilanis

other document

34 HCMR - CV Maravelias

other document

46 UAegean - CVs of other participating staff

other document

24 CISD - CV Ververis brief

other document

11 Nisyros-Decision of Municipality Council

other document

32 HCMR - CV Sioulas

other document

Page 296 of 296

Yes

No