Project no. FP6-018505Project Acronym FIRE PARADOX

Project Title FIRE PARADOX: An Innovative Approach of Integrated Wildland Fire Management Regulating the Wildfire Problem by the Wise Use of Fire:

Solving the Fire Paradox

Instrument Integrated Project (IP)Thematic Priority Sustainable development, global change and ecosystems

Deliverable D 7.3-1.1 (UPDATE)Assessment document on the main strengths and weaknesses of the legislation and spatial policy instruments concerning wildfire

integrated management in the EU, in European member states and in North African countries

Due date of deliverable: September 2009 Actual submission date: August 2009

Start date of project: 1st March 2006 Duration: 48months

Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable Partner nº 9: Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM-GIPSF)

Revision (1000)

Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2006)

Dissemination LevelPU Public XPP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission

Services)RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission

Services)CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission

Services)

Authors:

A. Lázaro

L. Galiana

S. Aguilar

A. Sesbou

In cooperation with:

J. Van Brusselen

We thank the members of the Expert Group on Forest Fires (EGFF) which includes the nominated experts from the European countries and advises the European Commission on fire related issues. This group which is closely linked with the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) established by the EC Directorate General for Environment and the Joint Research Centre (JRC), has contributed to the elaboration of this document by kindly answering our questionnaire. We are also grateful to Maria Maia for all her efforts to facilitate communication with the members of the EGFF.

Reference:

Lazaro A., Galiana L, Aguilar S., and Sesbou A., in cooperation with Van Brusselen J. 2008. Assessment document on the main strengths and weaknesses of the legislation and spatial policy instruments concerning wildfire integrated management in the EU, in European member states and in North African countries. Deliverable D 7.3-1.1 of the Integrated project “Fire Paradox”, Project no. FP6-018505, European Commission, 82p.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 2 of 88

Executive summary:

This report has been prepared as part of IP FIRE PARADOX (2006-2010), in the section related with Policies and Practices Assessment (Module 7). The overall objective of the Fire Paradox project is to set the basis for the analysis of wildfire policy instruments at the national and European level in order to provide recommendations for long-term policy measures and to encourage a shift towards integrated wildland fire management adapted to specific territorial contexts.

For this purpose, apart from sectoral policies which have the responsibility for national wildland fire management (forest and civil protection), it is considered necessary to analyse other public policies with influence in structural causes affecting wildland fires, which are out of the sectoral scope and are basic for wildfire initiation and propagation. Taking into account a cross-sectoral approach is even more crucial in the European context since no European Union (EU) Treaty provides for a comprehensive common forest policy to all member states but recognizes the need to support them in forest related issues through other EU policies.

Hence, this study includes an assessment of a selection of public policies with greater incidence in wildland fire management: spatial planning, agricultural and rural development policies, energy policy and environmental policy, focused in: i) identifying cross-sectoral policy impacts influencing wildfire prevention and propagation ii) assessing main strength and weaknesses they have for Integrated Wildland Fire Management. Results are presented at two levels: EU level and National level, the latter with two scales of detail through a pan-European and North African comparative assessment and national in-depth study cases. The assessment is based on a review of literature and bibliographical references, the analysis of regulatory and planning instruments at the EU, national and regional level, and complementarily, a questionnaire sent to the national experts of the Working Group of Forest Fire Prevention Experts (WGFFP), an informal working group composed by experts from the national authorities nominated by the EU Member States and the European Commission.

The report has identified some common findings about the role that territorial policies should play concerning integrated wildland fire management at the national and European level:

Recent communications arising from the European Commission (EC) bring about elements that suggest the beginning of a new period with regard to natural disaster prevention and its management from the different policy perspectives with incidence in this issue. A new period characterized by the inclusion of the risk perspective in the current EU policies and by taking better advantage of existing measures and fundings within the frame of these policies. This should be pursued coordinating both objectives and instruments with a global objective based on a territorial approach: natural disaster prevention and mitigation.

A cross-sectoral approach provides the opportunity to do an in-depth study of the structural causes affecting wildland fires and it also gives

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 3 of 88

the opportunity to get to know the possibilities for an intervention upon these.

It is necessary to assess the level of coincidence between the public policies’ objectives regarding wildland fires, that is, to what extent there are complementary or conflictive aims. Likewise, it is important to consider the potential negative impacts that might derive from these policies: spatial planning guidelines might under certain circumstances set the conditions for more devastating fires.

The adoption of a multilevel approach is needed when assessing the impact of public policies on wildland fire management: main guidelines stemming from the European Union, the regulatory framework coming form the state and sometimes the regional governments and finally, the implementation at the regional and local level.

Territorial policies should play a role in solving the wildfire problem, mainly in the prevention and propagation stages. Environmental and rural development policies are identified as those most directly involved in willand fire management (Forest and Civil Protection)

In spite of their possibilities, territorial policies lack effective implementation due to the subordinated character to forest and civil protection policies with regard to risk management.

A comprehensive spatial approach (vs generic approaches) for territorial policies is badly needed in order to achieve a more effective implementation in wildland fire management. Opportunities that derive from new spatial planning paradigms and EU tendencies (i.e.: new energetic priorities, forest value for rural development) should be considered in advance by risk managers.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 4 of 88

Table of contents:

1. INTRODUCTION 6

2. UNDERSTANDING CROSS-SECTORAL POLICY IMPACTS 7

2.1 Territory and territorial policies............................................................82.2 Territorial policies and underlaying causes...........................................9

3. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY 10

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 14

4.1 Cross-sectoral policy impacts at the European scale..........................14

4.1.1 Spatial Planning Policies.........................................................16

4.1.2 Agricultural and Rural Development Policies.............................21

4.1.3 Energy Policies..........................................................................24

4.1.4 Environmental Policies..............................................................264.2 Comparative assessment at the pan-European scale and North African countries...................................................................................................294.3 The Spanish study case......................................................................33

4.3.1 Widland fire management in Spain: institutional framework.....33

4.3.2 Assessment of spatial planning and other territorial policies with a role in wildfire risk management.....................................................37

4.3.3 Strengths and weaknesses of territorial policies regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management in the national/regional context............................................................................................................57

4.4 The Moroccan study case....................................................................60

4.4.1 Wildland fire management in Morocco: Institutional framework...........................................................................................................60

4.4.2. National strategy of forest protection against fires..................62

4.4.3. Evaluation of other legislations and policies having a link with forest fires..........................................................................................65

5. MAIN FINDINGS 70

6. REFERENCES 73

7. ANNEXES 76

Annexe I: Fire Paradox Questionnaire: Territorial Policy sheet..................767.3-1-40-1000 Page 5 of 88

Annexe II: List of experts that have replied the Fire Paradox Questionnaire.................................................................................................................. 78

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 6 of 88

1. INTRODUCTIONWildfires represent a serious threat for European forest, in relation to the ecologic, economic and social point of view, having broader implications beyond the forest itself and its national boundaries, including tragic impacts on human health and lives (FAO, 1999). This situation has been worsen in the second half of the 20th to become one of the major hazards for forests in Europe together with pollution, plagues and erosion.

However, the wildfire problem presents different territorial incidence in the European Continent since it is determined by different ecologic, socio-economic and political factors. The northern countries of the Mediterranean basin are the most affected, having the highest number of fires and the most extensive burned area reported with 300,000 to 500,000 ha. of forests and other wooded land burnt every year around (DG JRC, 2005). In this region, land use change dynamics have aggravated fire hazards and disaster potential due to increasing flammability of the ecosystems and a settlement model with a sharp trend to dispersion, which dangerously increases ignition risk. Changes with greatest incidence are: the abandonment of rural areas, change in forest policy priorities (from wood production to environmental services) and the growth of extensive wildland-urban interface areas (Xanthoupoulos and others, 2006). This situation contrasts with the reduced frequency of fires in south and east of the Basin, where these changes have not occurred, although this tendency appears to be extending from the Northwest to the East1.

To counter this situation, most part of European countries has adopted suppression-oriented policies2 greatly improving their fire suppression resources at high economic costs, with apparently acceptable results. The results of the efficient suppression actions have been a reduction in total annually burned area in relatively easy fire seasons; meanwhile, the potential for major disasters is still latent there with an increase in large fire events during difficult fire seasons (Xanthoupoulos et al, 2006). Moreover, in practice we find that national governments usually develop their wildland fire policies as an ad-hoc reaction to specific a situation which already have been created, and not as a preventive approach before the emergency is generated (FAO, 1999). Hence, structural factors basic in wildland fire initiation and propagation, which may not necessarily be within the forest sector, are left behind.

1 Self Assessment, conclusions and recommendations of the Regional Session: Europe, Southeast Europe, Mediterranean North Africa and Caucasus, held in 4th International Wildland Fire Conference (Seville, Spain. 2007)

2 In the European Union (EU) the responsibility of wildland fire management remains national and is developed, fundamentally, within Member States forest policy. However, the development of urban areas and fire services responsible for their protection, has in some cases shift the responsibility for widlland fire suppression to these services.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 7 of 88

Wildland fire management is not only affected by policies specifically defined for the sector, but also policies in other areas, such as: environment, natural resources and economy. Often these “external” policies have impacts which may lead to unintended or unexpected consequences outside the sectors where they have been implemented. Taking into account a cross-sectoral approach of policies with incidence in the territory, provides the opportunity to address the long term social, legal and economic factors with incidence in the way land is managed, which are out of the scope of forest policies: the structural causes of wildfire events.

The aim of the present document is to identify and analyse policy measures external to the forest sector with potential influence in wildland fire prevention and propagation in the European and national framework for European and North African countries. In order to do that, an assessment of a selection of policies with greater incidence in wildland fire management is developed: spatial planning, agricultural and rural development policies, energy policy and environmental policy. For all of them, the analysis will be focused in: i) identifying cross-sectoral policy impacts influencing wildfire prevention and propagation ii) an assessment on the main strength and weaknesses they have for Integrated Wildland Fire Management. In order to do that, results will be presented at two levels: European Union (EU) level and National level, the latter with two scales of detail through a pan-European and North African comparative assessment and national in-depth study cases.

The proposed methodological approach aims to obtain relevant conclusions in order to progress towards the formulation of a coordination framework (Integrated Wildfire Management) which ensures better coherence and suitability between the different types of planning with incidence upon the structural causes of wildfires. Likewise, it is important to assess whether current tendencies conduct towards an increasing coordination between the different policies or, on the contrary, there are no signs of these necessary convergence (in terms of objectives, methodology, priorities, etc.)

This study is developed within the FIRE PARADOX Project “An innovative Approach of the Integrated Wildland Fire Management Regulating the Wildfire Problem by the Wise Use of Fire: Solving the Fire Paradox” (2006-2010), an Integrated Project, funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme, whose overall objective is to establish scientific and technological bases for new legislation and policies in Europe and in Mediterranean North Africa. For this purpose, the project focuses on the fire paradoxes; from its negative impacts to its positive effects and from wildfires to management fires (prescribed and suppression fires).

2. UNDERSTANDING CROSS-SECTORAL POLICY IMPACTS Interactions between public policies are often multiple and complex to understand, due to the fact that political decisions in one policy domain affect directly or indirectly other policies. These interactions might be intentional, as a result of a coordinated process of policy formulation, while others may not be so, their effects being revealed only during the implementation process.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 8 of 88

Hence, cross-sector policy impacts can be defined as the supporting or impeding effects from one policy on another one (Dubé and Schmithüsen, 2003) and its understanding results essential since the success or failure of a given policy depends, to a large extent, on the supportive or impeding impacts that result from other policies. In the context of forest policies, cross-sectoral impacts are recognized as a major driving force in the forest sector (Schmithüsen et al, 2001). The multiple dimensions of forest ecosystems entails a great interdependency between forest policies with other public policies such as those related with economy, natural resources and the environment. The mentioned public policies have important positive and negative effects which might support or impede the development of forest policy programs and in particular those related with wildfire events. Regarding wildland fires, its complexity, derived of the different ecologic, socio-economic y political determining factors, implies the existence of several public policies with effect in its incidence, in particular the initiation and propagation stages (Badia et al, 2002). Moreover, the particularity of wildland fire management, where the responsibility, in some countries, is shared by Forest and Civil Protection Services, makes even more necessary a cross-sectoral approach to guarantee an effective collaboration. Schmithüsen (2003) points out as useful typological elements to specify cross-sectoral impacts over a given policy: i) the combination of relevant policy domains, ii) the regional and local socio-economic context, iii) the levels of political decisions, iv) the combination of policy instruments and v)the direction of impacts and the kind of outcomes and results that are produced.Therefore, this document is focused in a selection of policies identified as relevant regarding wildland fires due to its incidence in sustainable land use and natural resource management. These type of policies have been denominated in the document as Territorial Policies: (def) Development policies undertaken by public authorities - the central state as well as regional and local governments - with the aim of promoting a more efficient use of resources within specific geographical areas (OECD, 2003).

2.1 Territory and territorial policiesTerritory is a European English Word, from Latin etymology, which original and general meaning is a large extent of land. Nevertheless, the concept territory has gone through an important renovation during the last decades of the 20th century. From a strictly environmental and geometric understanding, considered as a tract of land, and apart from society existent within it, the concept has evolved towards a social and historic character: a reality which has been built along time, as a consequence of interactions established between society and nature, which adopts different representations depending on the specificities of a given place. This entails recovering the importance of space since phenomena differ from one place to another; however space understood under a geographic perspective which means the need to re-interpret society-nature interactions. Consequently, the core elements to be considered for the spatial analysis are: i) factors and processes related to the environment functioning and, ii) phenomena related to the evolution of social organization.7.3-1-40-1000 Page 9 of 88

According to the geographical concept of territory, territorial policies are the different public policies with incidence upon territory. That is, territorial policies express the will to intervene upon societies existent within the territory; an intervention which is posed from different sectoral perspectives and administrative levels (local, regional, national and European). The need for coordination between these policies and administrations and the cooperation needed for the development of policies are the main principles highlighted within the methodology used for the development of spatial plans. This is due to the incidence and contribution to the achievement of several types of objectives (e.g. consideration of the structural causes of wildfires in order to manage fire risk) Thus, it is necessary to assure the coherence and suitability of proposals posed from different public policies with incidence upon the territory, which entails working in different directions:a) Different methodological and conceptual approaches for the different types of planningb) Establishing administrative coordination mechanismsc) Referring to conflict resolution formulas in order to solve potential disagreements, etc..

The territorial policies to be analysed throughout the document are the following:a. Spatial Planning Policiesb. Agricultural and Rural Development Policiesc. Environmental Policy

In addition to the selected territorial polices, it has been considered necessary to incorporate the Energy Policy into the assessment to be developed at the European scale, since currently the European energetic model is an important issue for debate, and the use of forest biomass have acquired renovated relevance as a renewable source of energy; this might have consequences for the management of forest areas. At the national scale and in selected case-studies the use of forest biomass is considered as one of the factors with potential to enhance forest values, an issue which is contemplated within Rural Development Policies. In the next section, the different levels of assessment to analyse the cross-sectoral impacts between territorial policies and wildland fires are described, as well as the methodology to be applied for each of these levels.

2.2 Territorial policies and underlaying causesWildland fires, especially in the Mediterranean region, are more just than a consequence of periods of long drought; they can also be considered an indicator of the socioeconomic differences between the different areas and their respective levels of development. Some of the factors which had

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 10 of 88

influenced fire regimes in recent decades are closely related with changing socioeconomic conditions, among which the most relevant are3:

- Rural depopulation, leading to the abandonment of rural areas and changes in landscape due to invasion by natural and spontaneous vegetation which increases flammability. This factor also involves the aging of rural population which also increases risk due to the loss of knowhow in traditional burning practices.

- Concentration of population in urban areas, which increases the Wildland Urban Interface. The building of new residence (first or second homes) in the context of growing surrounding vegetation increases the risk.

- Shifts in priorities in forestry policy, which formerly were centred on the production of wood and other raw materials, area currently focused on nature conservation, landscape management and recreation.

Other factors with influence in the temporal variation of fire regimes during recent decades should be considered such as: climate change, changes in landscape configuration, changes in ignition causes and the success of predominant fire suppression policies (González and Pukkala, 2007).

Therefore, an important part of the causes for the wildland fire problem are left out of the traditional policy domains related with wildfire management (Forest and Civil Protection policies) and must be supported by other sectoral policies which cover the multiple dimensions of forest ecosystems such as those related with economy, natural resources and the environment (See Fig. 1)

Fig. 1.-Territorial policies in wildland fire management.

3 Self Assessment, conclusions and recommendations of the Regional Session: Europe, Southeast Europe, Mediterranean North Africa and Caucasus, held in 4th International Wildland Fire Conference (Seville, Spain. 2007)7.3-1-40-1000 Page 11 of 88

3. MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGYWhen analysing the cross-sectoral impact that territorial policies have on wildfires two levels of assessment are proposed.

The European Union level, where a cross-sectoral approach is especially relevant, since there is no EU Treaty provides a comprehensive common forest policy to all EU countries, but recognizes the need to support the Member States in forest related issues through other EU Policies.

The national level, where lays the responsibility to develop forest and civil protection policies and where takes place the most important interdependencies between these policies with other public policies, needing to consider the regional level for those decentralized countries due to the different multi-level governance structure. At the national level, two scales of detail were considered:

1. Comparative assessment at the pan-European and North African scale

2. In depth national case studiesThe analysis of territorial policies’ impact on wildfires at the EU level and for the in-depth national case-study has been developed through an extensive search and review in literature databases, scientific journals of high impact, expert networks, governmental and non-governmental agencies, international and European scientific research projects as well as EU and national/regional legislation and policy instruments. As an outcome of this process a general database divided into three categories has been created, comprising:

- Bibliographical and literature references: official reports from governmental and non-governmental agencies (i.e.: FAO, European Council, National Forest and Fire Services, The Nature Conservancy), European research project’s databases (i.e.: MEACAP and ARMONIA) and

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 12 of 88

review of bibliographic references in on-line databases (i.e.: Web of Science, Science Direct and Universities).- Expert contacts: Fire Paradox Partners, national representatives of the Working Group of Forest Fire Prevention Experts (WGFFP), regional government representatives and scientific researchers from European universities with intersectoral character. - Regulation texts and planning documents within the forestry and/or wildfire policy frame for the European Union as well as for Member States and North-African countries, the latter compiled at the national and regional level.

An additional source of information for the for the comparative assessment has been a questionnaire designed by the University Complutense of Madrid (UCM) in collaboration with FIRE PARADOX partners involved in the assessment of policies and practices within the Project, with two main objectives:

Firstly, compile all the relevant information about wildland fire policies, legal framework, cooperation mechanisms in wildland fire management, fire use practices and other relevant aspects at the national and regional level for EU-27 Member states and North African countries

But also, as a participation system to implicate the end-users in the process of policies and practices assessment in the frame of FIRE PARADOX and aware them about the aims of the project. Thus, since the aim of the project is to set the basis for new legislation and long-term policy measures, the policy-makers should be considered as stakeholders during the process, in order that our final results and recommendations were considered and applied.

In order to achieve these objectives, the questionnaire was addressed to EU member states, through the European Commission (October-November 2006), to the members of the Working Group of Forest Fire Prevention Experts4 (WGFFP), an informal working group composed by experts from the national authorities nominated by the EU Member States and the European Commission. The expert group deals mainly with operational issues related to wildfire prevention and fighting in the countries. National representatives have a complete and exhaustive knowledge of wildfire issues in their countries and account with primary access to information sources on these issues. For those European countries not represented in the WGFFP and also for the North African countries (Tunisia and Morocco), the questionnaires

4 It is important to notice that the WGFFP is an heterogeneous group of national experts due to the inter-sectoral character of wildfires issues (members of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Ministry of Environment or Ministry of Interior) and that not all the EU-27 countries are represented, being State Members not represented those countries where wildfires are not so important or hazardous http://ec.europa.eu/environment/forests/wgffp.htm

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 13 of 88

were addressed to national experts involved in wildland fire management such as government representatives and scientific researchers (See Annex 1). Regarding Territorial Policies, the questionnaire includes one section dedicated to public policies with influence in wildland fire management, denominated “Other Policies” (See Annex 2). This section provides qualitative information compiled through a set of multiple-choice questions in order to unify the answers as well as one open question. They are described below:

a. Whether the selected national/regional policies where considered as having real effect on wildland fire management. Y/Nb. Determination of the level of impact of the different territorial policies over the different stages of wildland fires: prevention, detection, propagation and extinction. Addressees had the option to quantify this impact from 0 (none) to 3 (very strong).c. Illustration of the potential positive/negative impacts with particular examples of measures relative to its country or region with reference to the Department in charge of these measures.d. Position taken by the policy regarding the development of Prescribed Burning (prevention) and Suppression Fire (suppression) practices in wildfire management. The options where: In favour/Un favourable/Not consideredf. The existence of linkages of this policy with the forest policy on cross-sectoral policy issues or interagency/intersectoral collaboration. Y/N

Responses to the questionnaire have taken place from December 2006 till the date, with a total of fifteen national responses received from: Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Morocco, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Tunisia.

Fig. 2.- WGFFP Questionnaire replies by June 2009

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 14 of 88

The comparative assessment provides information regarding the importance that territorial policies have in the different national contexts for wildland fire management and in Europe and North Africa as a whole. However results and conclusions at this level of assessment are not strong and must be given with caution due to several reasons:

The scarce results obtained up to date from the interviewers make it difficult to present a complete picture of the deliverable (See Fig.2).

The difficulty to identify national speakers with the capacity to respond for the cross-sectoral relations among the selected policies.

The unavoidable personal bias of questionnaire responses entails the need to consider the obtained results as an state of opinion more than a state of the art.

The lack of national studies and reports on cross-sectoral policy links for the selected policies in assessed countries which could have permitted to complete and contrast the information obtained by the questionnaire responses.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 15 of 88

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Cross-sectoral policy impacts at the European scaleAre we facing the beginning of a new period? Recent communications arising from the European Commission (EC)5 bring about elements that suggest the beginning of a new period with regard to natural disaster prevention and its management from the different policy perspectives with incidence in this issue. A new period characterized by the inclusion of the risk perspective in the current EU policies and by taking better advantage of existing measures and fundings within the frame of these policies. This should be pursued coordinating both objectives and instruments with a global objective based on a territorial approach: natural disaster prevention and mitigation.The EC communication A community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters (23 February 2009) points out how disaster prevention must be integrated into other EU policies, including development policy, and the need to seek areas where EU-level action bring added value to national responses (“explicitly seek to build on measures that have already been taken at European level”).The EC proposal is focused in those areas where a common approach turns out to be more efficient than the national approaches:

a) The development of knowledge (European-wide inventory of existing information and best practices, developing guidelines on hazard and risk-mapping, and improving access to early warning systems),

b) Linking stakeholders and policies c) Improving existing EU instruments for disaster prevention

In this sense, the EU executive wants to establish an inventory of existing Community instruments that could be used to finance disaster prevention activities and to list the measures for which member states could apply for EU funding. For this purpose risk prevention should be integrated into Community funding when the next financing perspectives are defined.This first attempt in introducing a more strategic approach is mainly related with the uncertainty caused within a scenario of increasing risk in the frame of climate. Also responds to the succession of extraordinary natural disasters occurred during the last years (floods in Central Europe in 2006; forest fires in Greece in 2007, etc.). Finally, it is also related to an institutional commitment: the binding EU contribution to the implementation of the Framework for Action of Hyogo 2005-2015, adopted in the World Conference on Disaster Reduction.However, this approach is not new and has precedents. Ten years ago the ESDP already pointed out the need for convergence and coordination between the different sectoral policies in order to achieve the desired goals

5 Communication on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters (23 February 2009). European Comission June 2009: Implementation plan to be presented.7.3-1-40-1000 Page 16 of 88

in spatial planning. For this purpose, the definition of a new conceptual framework is also needed to achieve greater coherence between the policy options of the ESDP and Community interventions which have a territorial impact (Schmidt-Thomé, 2006).The need for convergence and coordination pointed out by the ESDP has also been identified by other initiatives. For instance, by the incorporation of the risk perspective in the EU regional policy; this led to the inclusion of disaster prevention actions within the Structural Funds for 2007-2013 (Schmidt-Thomé, 2006; Fleischauer, 2007). Within the same frame, one of the aims of the ESPON project6 is to map those risks which are more relevant for the European context in order to provide an instrument for analysis for the cohesion and regional development policies, through the use of structural funds.

The situation until nowThe EU has recognized since the Eighties the need to support Member States in their efforts aimed to fight wildfires: taking into account the subsidiarity principle the Community has launched some relevant common activities having high added value, complementary to the national ones and aiming to give some guidance to national activities (Coletti, 2003). Several regulations and policy instruments support and contribute to the efforts made by Member States in wildfire fighting, notably prevention, suppression and restoration. Support on prevention activities carried out by Member States is represented mainly by regulations adopted within Environmental and Rural Development policies.In general, territorial policies are far from strictly considering wildfire-related objectives. In those cases where these objectives are contemplated, a vague approach seems to be the norm; wildland fires are frequently included among natural hazards in general. Moreover, the neglect of wildland fire objectives in these policies may set the conditions for more devastating fires.

Further, European policies that impinge most directly upon wildland fire management (i.e. forest-related policies) are not part of the acquis communautaire and lack therefore a compulsory nature. That is, forest plans will have to be drawn up by member states under the subsidiarity principle, thus allowing for heterogeneous results in terms of quality elaboration, comprehensiveness, targets specification and deadlines. In this respect, the absence of specific EU wildland fire management legislation plus the little Europeanization affecting those policies that most directly impinge upon wildfires, leads us to conclude that a concerned effort on this front is not likely to be anticipated in the foreseeable future. The most Europeanized policies analyzed in this section (i.e. the CAP and certain environmental policies) have only a marginally effect upon fire-related issues, as shown by results for each of the selected policies analysed below.

6 ESPON (European Spatial Planning Observation Network) is set up to support policy development and to build a European scientific community in the field of territorial7.3-1-40-1000 Page 17 of 88

4.1.1 Spatial Planning PoliciesAlthough the concept of Spatial Planning is not definitively settled, we can speak of a gradual reinforcement of the policy where significant progress has taken place in recent years. It is a policy where national specificities are of great importance but, at the same time, a process of convergence at the European level is taking place influencing both management objectives as well as the procedures for its implementation.

A few years ago, the EC proposed the following definition for spatial planning:

“Spatial planning refers to the methods used largely by the public sector to influence the future distribution of activities in space. It is undertaken with the aims of creating a more rational territorial organization of land uses and the linkages between them, to balance demands for development with the need to protect the environment, and to achieve social and economic objectives. Spatial planning embraces measures to co-ordinate the spatial impacts of other sector policies, to achieve a more even distribution of economic development between regions than would otherwise be created by market forces, and to regulate the conversion of land and property uses” (European Commission, 1997, p. 24).

This definition raises the double perspective among which the policy develops:

a) The compulsory regulation of the main elements defining the spatial or physical structure.

b) The coordination of the different sectoral policies with incidence in the territory

Both perspectives must be present in the spatial planning, where planning should be understood under a broad perspective, within the long term and conceived with the aim to achieve a balance between development and environmental objectives.

There is no possible way by which the countless public or private interventions on the territory can be controlled from a single policy based on the compulsory regulation of land use options. A cross-sectoral approach turns out to be an imperative; from this perspective, spatial planning is valued for its strategic role in coordination, more than its role in the compulsory regulation of land uses. It identifies and enhances other public policies with incidence in the territory incorporating the spatial dimension. At the same time, an increase of these type of considerations in sectoral policies is taking place (Harris, Hooper, 2004). Therefore, spatial planning could be defined as “the ensemble of territorial governance arrangements that seek to shape patterns of spatial development in particular places” (Nadin, 2008, 35).

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 18 of 88

Although Europe does not have a common spatial planning policy on its own, in recent years European orientations for spatial planning have been developed. This has provided a framework to be assumed by states and regions in the formulation for their territorial models. These orientations have been specified through the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) of 1999, which is, at the present moment, in its operative development stage.

Despite of this common reference, it is not possible to speak of a European model mainly due to the fact that spatial planning systems are deeply rooted within the socioeconomic, political and cultural context. This fact difficults the development of learning and cooperation processes with other experiences (Nadin, 2008, 35).

However this difficulty it is not impeding the emergence of a few signs of convergence, among which can be identified certain common objectives (territorial cohesion), or the will to place spatial planning as an instrument to ensure the convergence and coordination between different sectoral policies. This convergence must be related with the undeniable role that the ESDP strategy is playing in the reinforcement of the national spatial planning systems (Nadin, 2008, 35-6). A European reference that has no intention in shaping the spatial development in the different national context, but that is clearly and directly influencing in stakeholders involved in spatial development (Scott, 2006).

i) Consideration of wildfire issues: Positive and negative effects in wildfire management

Forest’s plans are nominally integrated in the spatial planning system (Montiel and Galiana, 2005). However, the need to connect forest policy, especially intervention on wildland fires, to spatial planning is one of the most common topics among any bibliographic contribution which tries to go into depth in the structural factors affecting wildland fires.

This approximation is done usually from the forestry perspective (Gómez, 2004), and particularly in relation with large fires, in which origin converges complex structural causes (mainly related to the crisis and abandonment of the agrarian sector and to the latter natural succession of vegetable masses) (Badia an others, 2002) which are not feasible to be approached under an exclusive sectoral optic. These structural causes are basically two of them (Plana, 2004): (i) A settlement model with a sharp trend to dispersion, which dangerously increases ignition risk and (ii) the evolution of forest vegetation towards a growing continuity of forest covers which favours wildland fire propagation.

The incorporation of risk prevention strategies in spatial planning seeks a twofold objective: a reduction in the vulnerability of the territory and a greater adaptation to the risk situations. These types of practices were initiated during the 80s in developed countries to be to expanded subsequently but not widespread. 30 years after their initiation, they remain an exceptional practice, despite the efforts to establish regulations in this field, especially since the mid 1990S. Lately, the integration of the vulnerability and risk into spatial planning has been clearly influenced by a

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 19 of 88

recent event: the growing sensitivity toward the effects of climate change and the need for mitigation and adaptation strategies. From this perspective spatial planning should play a prominent role since it is clear now that vulnerability patterns in the territory are key to understand the potential impact of climate change (Schmidt- Thomé, 2006).The truth is that Spatial Planning is increasingly incorporating the management of hazards and risks to each type of natural disaster individually but not in an integrated manner (only France considers all the natural and technological hazards relevant) (Fleischauer, 2007). This increasing tendency is justified by the will to rationalize the distribution of activities by incorporating a more cautious use of the territory and is supported by the growing sensitivity toward a more sustainable use of the same. However, in many cases, this process is being slowed down by practical reasons: mainly the lack of appropriate information for the correct evaluation of risks and their spatial planning (Schmidt-Thomé, 2006, 10).At this point, it is important to notice that spatial planning is only one of the factors to be taken in consideration in risk management. And, moreover, its role in this task is clearly subsidiary since only sectoral planning types are responsible for risk evaluation (Fleischauer, 2007). Within the process of hazard and risk assessment developed by the sectoral policies responsible for this issues (forest planning, fire management and civil protection) spatial planning should take the role of end-user.

The main requirement for spatial planning assuming the role of end-user is the existence of legally binding risk maps to support decision-making about the future use and territorial development by considering risk. For this purpose, the cartography must be focused in two issues: the scale and the components.

a) With regard to the scale, this must adjust to the assessment of the study areas, which usually is set up at two levels (regional and local).

b) With regard to the components, in order to intervene upon risk management spatial planning needs information on hazard exposure (exceptionally on vulnerability to hazard and risk) (Fleischauer, 2007).

There is evidence that large fire episodes are linked to structural causes which are profound, well-known and related with spatial planning. This entails that sectoral policies with direct responsibility in risk management (forest policies and civil protection) overestimate the role that spatial planning can and should play in this field. This idea is based on the fact that a great part of the current wildfire risk stems from the non-consideration of this risk in the control of the development of urbanized lands (Smith, 2004, 176; Burby, 1998, 9 and ss).

However, this consideration is correct only for certain type of territories, especially for those where wildland-urban interfaces have gained prominence in recent catastrophic episodes (Greece, 2007; Galicia, 2006; Portugal, 2005?) but has little to do with rural abandonment processes

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 20 of 88

which have initiated the reforestation of less urbanized areas towards increasing risk scenarios.

As already mentioned, in supporting the management of fire risk in forest areas spatial planning should be considered as end-user of the risk evaluation processes developed by forest and civil protection planning. Based on cartography developed by sectoral policies, spatial planning’s main contribution is to avoid the development of urbanized lands in risk areas. Spatial planning focuses mainly in risk mitigation due to the long term character of planning activities. It is important for reducing potential damages within the frame of non-structural mitigation (Fleischauer, 2007) by helping to define a less vulnerable territory less.

Spatial planning’s intervention is developed through the implementation of land use planning to different scales in space (Smith, 2004, 75):

a) Macro-zoning. Is responsibility for regional planning. At this level, it is possible to define major risk areas upon which intervene subsequently with more detail (definition of priority areas in order to address protection measures; introducing building regulations for new developments in certain areas, etc.)

b) Micro-zoning. Is responsibility of local planning (1:10.000), which must develop the regional plan’s contents. At this level must be set settlement restrictions in high risk areas:

- Preservation of not develop lands (risk prone, necessary to reduce risk or to guaranty effective responses)

- Distinctive decision-making upon land use (types of acceptable land uses)

- Recommendations (about building regulations).

Although it is at the local level where compulsory regulations on land use are developed and concretized, the importance of the regional level must not be overlooked. In occasions, the local scale affects territories which are too small to have an effective risk reduction. This must necessarily be based on broader areas. But in addition, the economic interests related to urban development have a very direct influence in the local level, which makes difficult to accept the imposition of restrictions at this level. The imposition from the regional planning of a binding legal framework for mitigation activities is very convenient and even essential (Fleischhauer, 2007).

In practice, this role is very limited for different circumstances. On the one hand, by the absence of risk cartography which is sufficiently accurate. It should be noted that spatial planning needs to have very precise information about the location and recurrence of fire risk in order to avoid transformations on development of urbanized lands. On the other hand, the definition of risk areas (and the related restrictions) is based on the potential hazard related with the low frequency of certain events which results in strong local authorities resistance (Smith, 2004, 75). This brings us

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 21 of 88

to the problem of acceptable risk that can lead to promote urban development in areas with a certain level of risk (Burby, 1998, 266).

Another constrain comes from the criteria handled by the spatial planning in forest areas. In this regard, it should be kept in mind that spatial planning is not only an end-user of the proposals developed by sectoral policies. It does not just translate principles coming from forest administrations, but introduces particular and differentiated principles for forest areas. In spatial planning instruments, forest areas are highly valued, with growing recognition for the territorial model (Galiana, 2004), which entails a generic conservation approach for various reasons: a) Exclusively territorial: forest areas considered as areas which provide an equilibrium to the development model, on the contrary to urban development processes, b) Functional: Due to the adequate functioning of the whole system, as productive areas of basic natural resources (water, air, …), recreation possibilities, etc. and c) Environmental: which favours valuable ecologic areas.

This entails a conservational approach for forest cover through the establishment of protected areas, which, as well as incorporating criteria considered by other types of planning (i.e. environmental, forestry), widens conservation motivations for protection by incorporating criteria more closely related with the functioning of territorial systems. An approach established through land use planning instruments (also recognised by forest planning) has been put into question by other recent approaches which insist on the need for a more strategic spatial planning approach (Davoudi, 2004).

The adoption of a more strategic perspective, aimed at detecting and regulating processes with the most relevant and innovative territorial incidence, considers the spatial plan as a rationalizing reference for the territorial processes which focus on actions with a potential for transformation in space and time. The main contribution for spatial planning would be the correct definition of those processes with a negative impact on the evolution of forest fire risk and the formulation of a proposal for intervention capable of becoming a point of convergence for the different policies with possibilities and willingness of intervention on the territory.

ii) Future trends. Strengths and weaknesses regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management.

Performance in wildland fire risk management under spatial planning is framed in the wider approach undertaken by the public policy on natural hazards, favouring a more sensible use for the territory within a sustainable territorial model, which incorporates the biophysic matrix and the dynamics knowledge unto the territorial analysis and diagnosis, from a systemic territorial approach (Folch, 2003). Thus, indeed, an inadequate urban or regional planning may aggravate the negative effects of natural hazards (floods, wildland fires), and on the contrary a correct land use organization may minimize the harms (DG JRC, 2005).

There is a generic treatment for land use occupation in relation with natural hazards, which usually tends to limit uses and activities in areas affected by

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 22 of 88

this kind of events to minimize harms caused by them. The need to establish limits precisely in this type of areas acquires a growing relevance in spatial planning legislation, a statement more and more common to spatial planning documents. The regulatory capacity for spatial planning instruments allows its incorporation to the protected areas category (either as differentiated lands or as a restrain imposed to other planning categories).

The mapping of wildland fire risk enables the establishment of this type of limitations and for this purpose, the approach and objectives of the map should be clearly defined. The indicator of greater importance is the extension of risk (to a lesser extent, the occurrence and intensity). In any case, it must not fail to take into account that the maps of risk and vulnerability produced based on these criteria show a static view of the current situation, while planning is related to future activities (and how changes in land use affect vulnerability).

Therefore, an analytic and diagnostic frame different from conventional spatial planning ones (zoning and regulatory) is needed, with new approaches in order to overcome the problems in land management (loss of biodiversity, wildland fire risk, etc…) (Marull and Mallarach, 2002). Identification of territorial functionality and its incorporation to the model, allow inter alia the definition of tools to measure the impact of wildland fires, areas sensible to ecologic damage, potential for urban development with less impact…Thus, an essentially dynamic frame for spatial planning would be set opposite to the static one of land use planning. Therefore, the availability of new instruments on modelling and fire prediction behaviour would allow the identification of strategic sites, not only from the suppression perspective (Plana, 2004), but also from spatial planning. Theoretically, the solution should be to create maps of risk scenarios, but its use in planning is very limited (Schmidt- Thomé, 2006, p. 24-26).

Nonetheless, this regulatory approach does not seem to be effective for wildland fires. Everything seems to point out towards a need for a change in the approach, towards a more strategic one, based upon the regulation of more relevant transformation processes under a global perspective (territorial model) and according to the socially acceptable capacity for transformation (i.e. loss of biodiversity, landscape modification, increase in vulnerability). This approach, from the perspective of wildland fires, has as a starting point, the need for the effective incorporation of conservation as an objective for territorial intervention towards a problem of considerable dimensions: the growing increase of large wildland fires. In the different settings for wildland fire risk management, proactive prevention tackles the risk for propagation through fuel management and landscape modification towards less vulnerable and more resilient structures.

On the other hand, another path which should be followed is the necessary bond of planning with territorial management through the setting of territorialized objectives as a basis for the subsequent assignment of resources relative to other policies (rural development, in particular)

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 23 of 88

4.1.2 Agricultural and Rural Development Policiesi) Consideration of wildfire issues: Positive and negative effects in wildfire management

From the beginning, agriculture has been one of the major priorities for the EU. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is regarded as one of its main policies areas, if we consider its extent, its share of the EU budget and the controversies it has aroused.

Although having successfully achieved the objectives for what it had been initially created and more than forty years after its conception, the CAP has undergone various reforms aimed at suppressing the collateral effects of previous versions, adapting to global changes occurred in the international scene and towards incorporating new elements of growing importance in the political agenda such as the environment, sustainability and rural development. In particular, the growing importance of rural development measures within the CAP corresponds to a reality where according to the European Commission (1997) approximately 80% of the territory of the European Union can be called ‘rural’, where due to major transformations in last decades agriculture is no longer the obvious pillar of the countryside (Elands and others, 2001). Thus, the future of the agrarian sector is closely related with the sustainable development of rural areas.

At present, Europe is undergoing a momentum towards a Rural Development policy characterized not so much sectorally but spatially. Both from EU as well as member-state countries Both from the EU as from the member countries has emerged a political paradigm that puts the accent on the change in the rural policy from policies of agricultural support toward the territorial development and spatial approaches (Scott, 2006). The rural defined in a relational sense (in connection with the urban), but also including the rural within a new regional policy at European level (Scott, 2006)

Measures with potential effects in forestry, and thus in wildland fires, are mainly included amongst actions in the “second pillar” of the CAP, which comprise measures aimed at supporting broader rural development and environmental objectives to constitute the EU rural development policy. From the policy point of view, forestry is increasingly recognised as one of the activities to be considered in such development (Slee and Wiersum, 2001).

The growing importance of the role that forests play in the rural development has been reflected in the evolution of the rural development policy: forestry measures undertaken by the CAP have evolved from mainly afforestation measures7, to the constitution of a specific group of measures on forestry covered by the Rural Development Regulations8. Thus, 7 Council Regulation (EEC) nº 2082/92 Reformulation of a system of aids for afforestation

8 Council Regulation (EEC) nº 1257/99 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and 7.3-1-40-1000 Page 24 of 88

objectives have widened to sustainable forest management and development of forestry, maintenance and improvement of forest resources and extension of woodland areas. This fact has enabled to introduce new measures in addition to afforestation considering the multifunctional role of forestry and support for forest protection values. The present Rural Development Regulation for the programming period 2007-2013 includes a set of measures targeting the sustainable use of forestry land trough: first afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural lands, first establishment of agro-forestry systems, restoring forest potential and introduction of prevention actions, Natura 2000 and forest-environment payments, and support for non productive investments.

Regarding forest protection, the Rural Development Regulation makes explicit mention to forest fires regarding the funding of prevention measures as well as restoration activities in forests damaged by natural disasters and for the maintenance of fire breaks through agricultural measures. Moreover, all measures proposed upon forestry in medium or high forest fire risk areas within the framework of the Community action on protection against fire, must conform to the forest protection plans established by the member states for these areas9.

ii) Future trends. Strengths and weaknesses regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management.

As forests acquire an increasing role in the development of local communities in forest areas, Agricultural and Rural Development Policies have greater potential to influence structural causes affecting wildland fire initiation and propagation.

Some of these measures are in close relation with forest protection and wildland fire prevention. Thus, the Rural Development Regulation constitutes, one of the main instruments for the support of prevention and restoration activities to be carried out by the Member States, co-financed by the created European Agricultural Fund for Rural development (EARFD) for the present programming period 2007-2013.

However the potential of rural development policies in solving the wildland fire problem is most important in those measures aimed at guaranteeing the maintenance of viable local communities in both the social and economic sense. The Rural Development Regulation pursues this aim not only by improving the competitiveness of the traditional rural sectors (agriculture and forestry), but also by promoting the diversification of the rural economies (i.e. tourism and micro-enterprises) and improving the quality of life in these areas. In this context, the promotion of the multifunctional role of forest contributes to the development of rural communities depending on forest areas and in the long term constitutes a guarantee for forest conservation, especially in the European context where forest ecosystems are subject of growing anthropogenic pressure.

repealing certain regulations. Council Regulation (EEC) nº 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)

9 Council Regulation (EEC) nº 1783/2003 amending regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)

From this perspective forests are valued for their potential to contribute to the local economy through (non-)wood production and manufacturing and provision of attractive recreation and tourism facilities, to create an attractive environment for living and working, to maintain biodiversity and protect natural resources, and to preserve and enhance characteristic rural landscapes and related cultural heritage (Elands et al, 2004). This is especially relevant in areas with conflict in clandestine burnings, such as in the Mediterranean areas where fire remains an important tool in rural activities as a mean for making wildlands profitable and constitute the main cause for the initiation of wildland fires. Thus, if the only uses out of wildlands are to be pastures and open spaces where to grow crops, the result is that rural burnings are a practice impossible to end with, being used regardless of the consequences that they can entail (Vélez, 2000).

Moreover, the maintenance of rural activities in forested areas such as use of forest fuel, establishment of agro-forestry systems or the harvesting of non-wood forest products such as mushrooms or hunting activities, favours discontinuities in forest vegetation, which in the long term sets up the best defence against increasingly frequent large fires events. In this sense, the promotion of forest biomass as a renewable source of energy is an alternative which besides reducing forest fuel accumulation might bring opportunities for communities’ local economies.

However, although Rural Development Regulations establish the need to assure compliance of all co-funded forestry measures developed in high or medium forest fire risk areas with forest protection plans established by Member states, in practice we find measures which on the contrary may worsen the wildland fire problem. The excessive use of afforestation may have a harmful effect for wildland fires occurrence since it increases the continuity of vegetation fuels and thus, the potential for more devastating fires. The use of fast growing species, such as pine or eucalyptus, contributes as well to increase fire hazard. Moreover, the need to assure compliance with forest fire dynamics should be considered for other measures undertaken by CAP which may indirectly affect forest areas such as the effect of decoupling payments from production, which although beneficial for the extensification of less land use may also induce disappearance of livestock and thus the threat of land abandonment and a decrease in the area of extensive pasture (Zdanowic et al, 2005). On the other hand, funding for livestock without the necessary increase in pasture areas, might as well have a negative effect in wildland fires incidence due to the use of clandestine burnings by rural population to create them.

4.1.3 Energy Policiesi) Consideration of wildfire issues: Positive and negative effects in wildfire management

Energy policy, unlike environmental policy, is not an EU legally-binding policy on the whole. Energy-related decisions have been considered as affecting member states’ crucial interests and are therefore still subject to unanimous rule in the European Council. Unanimity facilitates the exercise of veto power by individual states and slows down the progress towards a European energy policy. As a consequence, and in contrast with a growing number of policy decisions that have gradually come to be taken in

accordance with the majority rule, energy policy has been Europeanized only to a very limited extent.

In spite of that, the EU clearly acknowledges the relevance of energy issues, as it is exemplified both in its international leading role regarding the promotion of the Kyoto Protocol and in its support of renewable energies (RE) at the European level. As far as Kyoto is concerned, the EU has set quantifiable targets in terms of emission reduction for its different member states and an explicit reference to the protection and enhancement of sinks and reservoirs of greenland for the promotion of sustainable forest management practices, afforestation and reforestation has been made. In 2007, EU Environment Ministers have committed to achieve “at least a 20% reduction” in EU greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. In December 2008, the European Parliament agreed on national emission reduction targets for EU member states for 2020, relative to 2005. Regarding renewables a proof of its importance is the EU’s recent commitment to increase the share of renewable energy sources in total gross energy consumption to 20% in 202010. Further, the two areas are strongly intertwined: for example, the reduction of CO2 –as one of the six gases affecting climate change covered by the Protocol- is clearly linked with the fostering of sustainable energies.

The increased use of renewable energy sources, including forest biomass, in energy consumption is a marked characteristic in current EU and national energy policies. In forest policies, the use of forest biomass for energy is usually supported as a sustainable form of energy that contributes to social welfare, local development, and forest economy. Energy legislation is used directly as a tool to promote renewable energy including forest and other biomass, whereas forest legislation rather works to ensure sustainably produced forest biomass (Stupak et al, 2007).

The recurrence of wildland fires, being aggravated by global warming and subsequently compounding the greenhouse effect itself, should obviously be targeted as an objective of EU energy decisions. In this respect, the Kyoto protocol, as mentioned before, not only envisages tradable emission permits but also promotes forests as sink recipients of CO2. More indirectly related to the fires issue is the attempt to improve energy efficiency (aiming at saving 20% of energy consumption by 2020 through improving energy efficiency11) and to secure energy supply. Since the EU is severely dependent upon energy imports12, the promotion of endogenous sustainable sources, such as biomass (following the Danish and Finnish successful examples), has been envisaged.

10 European Parliament legislative resolution of 17 December 2008 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (COM (2008)0019-C6-0046/2008-2008/0016(COD))

11 Action Plan for Energy Efficiency: Realising the potential, Communication from the Commission of 19 October 2006 (COM (2006)545-Not published in the Official Journal)12 At present, the EU depends on imports to meet 50% of its energy needs. This percentage is expected to increase up to 70% in 2030 with a growing reliance on oil and gas.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 27 of 88

Leaving aside Kyoto and RE, most energy-related decisions have been basically taken in connection with other adjacent policies (e.g. foreign affairs, internal market – i.e. fair market opportunities for renewables, and of course environmental protection –i.e. the last Environmental Action Programme has emphasised climate change as an outstanding challenge).

ii) Future trends. Strengths and weaknesses regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change entered into force in the EU as late as the 16 February 2005 and the necessary time span to assess its impact is consequently missing. Further, the subsidiarity principle, that has entailed a bigger role for member states (or its constituent units, be they regional or local governments) vs the EU Commission, alongside the sustainable development (SD) European programme, that allows for many different -and sometimes contradictory- ways to attain sustainability, compound the problems surrounding the assessment of the influence of EU energy policy on wildland fires. Both factors, subsidiarity and SD, might aggravate the very unequal performance of the different member states as far as Kyoto is concerned. Following the “principle of differentiated responsibilities”, that have guided the attribution of diverse emission quotas to the different countries, some member states, such as Spain, are lagging well behind their assigned CO2 reduction duties, whereas others like France and the United Kingdom are clearly outperforming the rest. The absence of EU enforcement powers to reduce the gap between “law-abiders” and “law-breachers” is in this respect striking. Further, as the case of the Kyoto Protocol clearly exemplifies, energy agreements signed by the EU in the international arena have not been conducive to strict Community monitoring of the member states’ performance in curbing CO2 emissions, let alone to their punishment when they clearly deviate from the targets they have been assigned. This agreement revolves mainly around cooperative (with the other contracting parties) and voluntary (exchanges of experience or information) mechanisms while it also mentions the need to coordinate national policies to tackle work more effectively. To sum up, despite the UE’s clear commitment to the success of Kyoto regionally (it has set out to reduce global CO2 by 8% between 2008-2012 as compared to 1990) and internationally (it has exerted pressure upon non-signatory countries), the Community has not yet announced how it will penalize those member states that do not comply with CO2 targets and is basically supporting voluntary strategies to the detriment of more forceful ones. Lack of sanctions and voluntarism might aggravate poor performance of an international treaty that contains important potential for tackling fire forests.

As regards RE, although certain sectors and specific countries have clearly deviated from a rather uninspiring norm, little progress can be detected between 1997 and 2000. The problem lies again in the overall absence of clear mandates and compulsory goals, as most EU decisions in this field adopt the shape of communications (or strategies and white papers). The case of biomass clearly exemplifies this point: in an area that is considered crucial for energy supply and CO2 reductions, the Commission has merely confined itself to supporting voluntary measures. A Communication has established that “it is necessary to disseminate knowledge and information

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 28 of 88

more widely within the European Union and to launch promotion campaigns stressing the energy, environmental and economic aspects of this technology”. Further, lack of policy coordination and insufficient funding is impairing the process leading to biomass production while support for forestry biomass is still insufficient in half of the European countries (Directive 2001/77/EC). This situation is discouraging since biomass could provide a solution for the overgrowth of forests masses, thus reducing the risk for wildland fire initiation and propagation. At last but not the least, forests act as natural sinks for air pollutants and contribute enormously to reduce global warming.

Not every aspect concerning renewables is of course left to the member states’ free judgement. A number of directives, establishing binding goals and discretional means for their attainment, have also been approved, as the case of Directive 2003/30/EC on the promotion of the use of bio fuels or other renewable fuels for transport shows. This legal instrument sets a minimum percentage of bio fuels to replace diesel or petrol for transport purposes in each member state: the minimum share of bio fuels sold on their markets should be 2% by 31 December 2005 at the latest, and 5.75% by December 2010. The recent climate and energy package adopted by the European Parliament sets a goal of 20% greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2020, and a 20% share of renewable in energy consumption. However, no strict legal action was agreed upon for those states that do not take ‘appropriate measures’ towards their targets. As previous experience has shown, implementation deficit is likely to affect the enforcement of this and other energy-related directives.

4.1.4 Environmental Policiesi) Consideration of wildfire issues: Positive and negative effects in wildfire management

Since its inception at the end of the 60s-early 70s, environmental policy in the EU has been gradually moving towards sustainability. As a matter of fact, the last two Environmental Action Programmes (EAP) have incorporated sustainability into their titles and made this concept a very prominent one. During this process, environmental protection achieved formal recognition (in the 1986 Single European Act) and increased its “assertiveness”, as shown by the fact that subsequent EAP ceased to consider the environment as something that should be regulated because of its spill-overs on the internal market but rather because it was an important asset in itself. Connected with growing assertiveness was the enlargement of environmental powers assumed by the Commission.

Yet, the initial environmental legislative impetus of the Commission started to be subject to criticism since the mid 80s as a result of the increasing popularity of the subsidiarity principle, advocated by countries that either wanted to pursue their own stringent environmental policies without having to accommodate environmental laggards (such as Denmark), or were willing to reject the “illegitimate interference” of the European Environment Agency in certain fields such as bird protection (as the case of Great Britain under the Thatcher government shows). As a consequence of this, less directives have been passed recently while proposals for new frame 7.3-1-40-1000 Page 29 of 88

directives (eg. the 2000 water framework directive, 60/2000) have been made. This will entail that the directive, as the main legal instrument in environmental policy hitherto, will lose its initial specific focus and become more lax and vague as a policy tool. A new approach on better implementation, rather than simple legislative elaboration, as well as a new consensus on the need to combine command-and-control instruments with market-based, voluntary and self-regulatory and educational measures, are at the base of this new policy paradigm13. Another element of the “new” EU environmental policy is related to “conditionality”: the distribution of funds -LIFE, cohesion fund, structural funds- will increasingly come to depend on the fulfilment of environmental objectives. The Cardiff Process has also entailed that environmental concerns be incorporated into all other policy areas by means of the application of the environmental integration principle; that is, environmental policy will gradually be less of a traditional sectoral policy but rather an objective incorporated into all environmentally-related policies. Finally, the role of the EU as a signatory party to international environmental agreements is on the rise.

Of all the areas that environmental policies might embrace, those that could impinge more directly upon forest fires are: water policies that link the quality of the resource with the preservation of a minimum flow in the basin unit; air policies that combat climate change by means of forestation schemes that might contribute to decrease CO2 emissions through the promotion of the sink effect; urban waste policies that aim to eliminate illegal dump sites in semi urban/rural populations; and conservation and biodiversity policies that focus on the fight against desertification and the promotion of sustainable development schemes in forest and semi-rural areas. Leaving aside the explicit reference to fires provided by a number of regulations14, most environmental norms do not address this problem explicitly.

ii) Future trends. Strengths and weaknesses regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management.

Unlike the energy policy, environmental protection is mainly based on directives and increasingly on frame directives (that streamline the bulk of 13 Alongside hard harmonization (legislation), diffusion and emulation (i.e. networking, best practice exchange -the cases of IMPEL or European Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental Law, The Community Framework for Cooperation to Promote Sustainable Urban Development-), know-how transfer and better governance are being increasingly promoted.

14 i.e.: EC Nº 1727/1999 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) Nº 2158/92 on protection of the Community's forests against fire). Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 concerning monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the Community (Forest Focus). Their financial contribution towards wildland fire has been recently replaced by Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 may 2007 concerning the financial instrument for the environment (LIFE +).

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 30 of 88

norms under a single piece of legislation), this entailing that environmental objectives enjoy a legally-binding force. However, implementation deficit, as well as lack of enforcement powers on the part of the EU have been traditionally identified as the main explanatory factors of slow progress in this area.

As the habitat directive 92/43, establishing the European network of protected areas Natura 2000 (as well as the previous birds directive 79/409) shows, when it comes to defining, adjusting and implementing those legal instruments the crucial actors are the member states. That is, responsibility for the designation of areas to be preserved as well as for the choice of areas where birds should be protected, fall under the remit of national or regional authorities. The lists containing these sites that are sent to Brussels reflect not only the particular biases of contingent party politics but also the zeal of the different bureaucracies, not to mention radically different administrative capacities as well as diverse well-entrenched traditions of cooperative/non-cooperative links between interest groups and public actors. An important mechanism to overcome potentially divergent outcomes is the possibility, opened to private citizens and environmental groups by the Commission, to sue the country for breaching or misinterpreting EU conservation law. This mechanism is nonetheless severely curtailed by the legal complexities surrounding the opening of judicial cases against EU member states, this being one of the reasons why the previous Environmental Commissioner, Wällstrom, announced the “name, shame and fame” strategy to draw attention upon those countries systematically breaching environmental law.

If implementation deficit has been parallel to legally-binding instruments, deficit can be expected to be more acute when it is flanked by instruments lacking binding force (for example, the Commission proposal concerning a biodiversity action plan for the conservation of natural resources through the use of specific silvicultural techniques to better mimic natural processes, or the VI EAP that, covering the period 2002-2012, has identified nature and biodiversity as one of its four priority areas).

Another important element in current environmental policy is the growing reliance on what might be termed as “voluntarism”, as exemplified in information-exchange mechanisms, best-practice transfer, private networking and the like. A clear example in this respect is the call to set up a network for the exchange of prevention practices and tools in relation to natural accidents and disasters that the heading Nature and Biodiversity (VI EAP) contains. Important as they might be, these mechanisms reflect the new self-regulatory mood that has swept across the EU, pushing more traditional and forceful instruments to a peripheral position. Besides, the usefulness of these mechanisms is likely to be strongly impaired by the absence of standard reports or by a non-existent tradition of adjustment to universal, clear-cut criteria subscribed to by different member states against which comparative assessments can be made.

To sum up, the dilution of the EU environmental policy into the SD programme might prove negative for fire-management proposals since new possibilities for divergent national plans and outcomes open up now. The

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 31 of 88

gradual loss of impetus of the Europeanization process might equally impair the attainment of harmonized and coherent measures that tackle the fire problem at the EU level. Although the subsidiarity principle contains an important element of truth when advocating that certain environmental problems (such as wild fires) are best dealt with at the local or regional level, lack of involvement of the EU might result both in unequal and unsatisfactory outcomes and the emergence of obstacles in terms of lesson-drawing experiences.

4.2 Comparative assessment at the pan-European scale and North African countriesThis section includes an approximation to the impact that territorial policies have for wildfire management at the national level. Next a comparative assessment based on the questionnaire replies from the Working Group of Forest Fire Prevention Experts (WGFFP) and other national experts15 is presented. Most part of the questionnaire responses acknowledge the influence that territorial policies have upon wildland fire management, especially in prevention and propagation stages. The variability of responses is related with the different responsibilities assumed by each of the policies with incidence in wildfire management. While most of the interviewed countries consider rural development and environmental policies as those having a real influence for risk management, the role of spatial planning is more controversial. Likewise, the non existing influence associated by most countries to energy policy is possibly due to the indirect link perceived between wildfire management and energy issues (energetic diversification – renewable energy use – enhancement of forest biomass value – potential profitability of fuel management operation – control of flammable biomass).

Another common characteristic is the positive evaluation and the importance given to linking natural hazards with the territorial character that have the selected policies. However, in practice this link is something exceptional. Only in France the regional level plays an important role in decisions related with the development and distribution of preventive infrastructures against hazards supported by agencies such as CARIP (Cellule d'Analyze des risques et d'Information Préventive) that control much of the process of risk management. The most widespread situation is the absence of coordinating organizations for the risk management at regional level. When there is, the coordination is limited to information exchange (Finland, United Kingdom), while in other countries, both areas are entirely separate (Greece, Germany) (Fleischhauer, 2007).

Eleven out of fifteen of the interviewed countries, have considered Environmental Policy as influential for wildland fire management, in all the stages but mainly in prevention. Only Morocco, Austria, Greece and Latvia have found this influence not relevant.

Most countries find this influence as strong to medium, since environmental policy is identified as important for the protection against fires of natural 15 For more information related to the questionnaire, see section 3 “Material and Methodology”7.3-1-40-1000 Page 32 of 88

biodiversity and specially protected areas. However, this influence has been identified in some cases as negative, due to the fact that this policy has the potential to reduce fire risk but increase fire hazard through the overprotection of forest areas as pointed out by Portugal. Although least considered, some countries such as Spain, Portugal and Poland have considered the influence of this policy on the suppression stage as very strong which might be due to the responsibility that environmental policy has for fire suppression in these countries.

Rural Development and Agricultural policies have been identified as influential for wildland fire management by 10 of the 15 interviewed countries: the EU Mediterranean countries (France, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Cyprus), together with Tunisia, and Lithuania, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Austria. The effect of these policies over wildland fire management is considered more important in prevention and propagation stages, although the influence considered varies among countries.

Measures specified by the requested countries range from positive to negative impacts. Among positive impacts, rural development and agricultural policies are considered a source of funding for fire prevention measures, awareness campaigns, silvicultural treatments, defence infrastructures, biomass reduction or agro-environmental measures. However other measures directed to the agrarian sector are identified as having important negative consequences for wildfires such as agriculture set-aside causing the loss of agro-forestry mosaics or funding for livestock without considering an increase of pasture areas. Related to this last issue,

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 33 of 88

Spain has incorporated the occurrence of wildfires as a criterion for granting subsidies for a given area.

Almost half of the 15 requested countries consider that spatial planning have real effects on wildfire management. We can differentiate between EU Mediterranean countries (France, Spain, Slovenia, Portugal, Italy and Cyprus) and North African countries (Tunisia and Morocco), since the latter find spatial planning not influencing wildfires. Situation in northern and eastern counties is more variable, while Sweden and Lithuania consider this policy influential; Latvia, Poland, Austria and Bulgaria do not find it relevant. Greece is an exception among the Mediterranean countries since it considers spatial planning as not influential.The evaluation of these results should be considered within the nature of the spatial planning policies in different countries. As noted in the heading 4.1.1., national specificities are of great importance in the definition and the nature of this policy. In what refers to regional spatial planning, three categories of countries can be distinguished: A) Countries with institutional regional planning: binding regional plans

(Finland, Germany, Italy, Spain o Poland)B) Countries with institutional regional planning: non binding regional plans

(United Kingdom)C) Countries with non institutional regional planning: only regional

coordination schemes (France, Greece) (Fleischauer, 2007).

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 34 of 88

On the other hand, it must be considered that some countries (United Kingdom, Germany) do not consider wildland fire risk in their spatial planning policies, while others do (generally Mediterranean countries –France, Greece, Spain and Italy, but also Finland or Poland) (Fleischauer, 2007).

Out of the different stages of wildland fire management, spatial planning is considered more influential in the prevention and suppression stages. Measures identified by the requested countries refer to urban planning and zoning in fire risk areas, especially in WUI areas. Moreover, the increasing phenomena of WUI explain that spatial planning policies explains that this policy is also considered as having strong and very strong impacts for suppression stages (Italy, France, Portugal and Spain), since land use planning in these areas may either facilitate/difficult the suppression actions and/or evacuation.

Energy policy is the least considered by the requested countries, identified relevant only by Portugal, Italy and France, but with strong impact over prevention and propagation stages. Measures which exemplify this influence focus in the adoption of forest biomass for energy production and the aids and incentives for the collection and transformation. This activity not only reduces fuel accumulation but also constitutes a viable source of income for rural population. This might be the reason why some countries have not considered this potential within this policy but from Rural Development Policies, among which some countries have adopted these orientations.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 35 of 88

4.3 The Spanish study case 

4.3.1 Widland fire management in Spain: institutional frameworkThe national Civil Protection Act16 defines Civil Protection as “the physical protection of people and goods, in situations of serious collective risk, public calamity or extraordinary catastrophe, in which the security and lives of people may be in danger or die massively”. Hence, it is a public service whose responsibility corresponds fundamentally to the State’s Civil Protection Services through the coordination and direction of the different Administrations and Civil Society in an event of these characteristics

The extraordinary heterogeneity of emergency types entails that Civil Protection, more than replacing, needs to act through the management, planning, coordination and direction of the different public services involved in the emergency in which they intervene. This type of intervention is translated in sectoral and territorial principles for planning, in whose definition, integration and up-date should collaborate all the different administrations.

According to this, the principles for intervention in risk situations stemming from Civil Protection are:

1. Intervention upon risk situations under all possibilities and at all moments, by Administrations as well as Civil Society (Security Culture)

16 Civil Protection Act ( 2/1985, January, 21st 1985) 7.3-1-40-1000 Page 36 of 88

2. Differentiation for risk intervention stages: forecast, prevention, planning, intervention and rehabilitation.

3. Forecast and prevention as main objectives for action and their consideration according to the principles for emergency intervention: sectoral and territorial.

The territorial principle entails the intervention upon risk from different levels. In particular for Spain, the Autonomous Regions assume the responsibility of risk management, which they implement in coordination with other local corporations through planning at different scales: regional plans (Planes Territoriales de Emergencia), subregional (provinces), municipal or insular.

The sectoral principle entails the different intervention upon an emergency depending on the type of risk event (i.e.: wildfire, flood, earthquake). In particular, Spain has specific plans (Planes Especiales) which tackle risk management from different sectors of activity, types of emergency and particular activities.

Wildland fires, are situations which are susceptible of creating damages for people and goods, and thus, framed within Civil Protection responsibilities. However, the sectoral principle for intervention granted by this public service entails wildfire management to be approached mainly by Forest Services, being limited Civil Protection’s intervention to those situations where people or assets might be threatened by fire or in emergencies which might derive in national interest17. Nevertheless, during the last decades, the growth of urban areas and civil protection Services in charge of their protection, have caused an increasing tendency in shifting suppression responsibilities in favour of these services.

The particularity of the Spain case-study, as a country with a political decentralized structure, defines a distribution for forest and civil protection responsibilities18 which mainly falls within the regional level. Regarding the specific management of wildfire risk, since the beginning of the 80s Autonomous Regions are responsible of prevention, detection and suppression tasks as well as for the elaboration of non-basic legislation regulating this activity. The State is in charge of the logistic support to Autonomous Regions in suppression, general coordination of wildland fire interventions taken place within the country limits as well as for the management of a national statistical data-base; at the international level the State is also in charge of cooperation activities and establishing the main principles to guarantee international agreements.

17 Civil Protection Regulation about the Basic Wildland Fire Emergency Planning (Orden 2 de abril de 1993)

18 Established by the Spanish Constitution of 19787.3-1-40-1000 Page 37 of 88

According to this situation, currently the institutional framework involved in wildland fire management for the Spanish case-study needs to be presented at the regional level, with two possible models for responsibilities’ distribution (See Table 1):

Prevention and Suppression responsibilities depend both on Forest Services, either integrated in the Environmental Service or in the Agricultural and Rural Development Service.

Prevention and Suppression responsibilities depend on two different services: Forest Administration and Civil Protection Service.

Table 1: Responsibilities distribution in the Autonomous Regions and the planning documents for their coordination.

Autonomous Region

RESPONSIBILITIES IN PREVENTION

RESPONSIBILITIES IN SUPPRESSION

EMERGENCY PLAN AGAINST

WILDFIRES

ANDALUCÍARegional Ministry of Environment;

DG. of Nature Environment Management

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. of Nature Environment

ManagementINFOCA

ARAGÓN Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Forest Management

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Forest Management PROCINFO

ASTURIAS Regional Ministry of Environment and Rural Development

Regional Ministry of Presidency, Justice and Equality INFOPA

ISLAS BALEARES

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Forest sector and species

protection

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Forest sector and species

protectionINFOBAL

ISLAS CANARIAS

Regional Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning; DG. Nature

Environment

Regional Ministry of Environment for each island (Cabildo insular)

Regional Ministry of Presidency, Justice and Public Safety; DG.

Safety and Emergencies

Regional Ministry of Environment for each island (Cabildo insular)

INFOCA

CANTABRIARegional Ministry of Rural

Development, Cattle, Fishing and Biodiversity; DG. of Wildland and

Nature Conservation

Regional Ministry of Rural Development, Cattle, Fishing and Biodiversity; DG. of Wildland and

Nature ConservationINFOCANT

CASTILLA Y LEÓN

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Nature Environment

Regional Ministry of Environment; DG. Nature Environment INFOCAL

CASTILLA -LA MANCHA

Regional Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development; DG. Forest

Policy

Regional Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development; DG.

Forest Policy

Plan Especial de Emergencia por

incendios

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 38 of 88

forestales

CATALUÑARegional Ministry of Environment

and Housing; DG. Nature Environment

Regional Ministry of Interior, Institutional Relations and

Participation; DG of Fire Prevention and Suppression and Rescue

INFOCAT

COMUNIDAD VALENCIANA

Regional Ministry of Environment, Water, Urban Planning and

Housing; DG. of Nature Environment Management

Regional Ministry of Justice and Public Administration; DG. Interior

Plan especial frente al riesgo

de incendios forestales

EXTREMADURA

Regional Ministry of Industry, energy and environment; DG. of

Environment.

Regional Ministry of Industry, energy and environment; DG. of

EnvironmentINFOEX

GALICIARegional Ministry of Rural

Development; DG. Wildlands and Forest Industry

Regional Ministry of Rural Development; DG. Wildlands and

Forest Industry PLADIGA

MADRID Regional Ministry of Justice and Interior; DG. Civil Protection

Regional Ministry of Justice and Interior; DG. Civil Protection INFOMA

MURCIARegional Ministry of Presidency and

Public Administrations. DG. Civil Protection

Regional Ministry of Presidency and Public Administrations. DG.

Civil Protection INFOMUR

NAVARRARegional Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning and Housing;

DG. EnvironmentRegional Ministry of Presidency, Justice and Interior; DG. Interior PLAINFONA

PAÍS VASCO Diputación Foral Álava; Regional Ministry of Environment

Diputación Foral Vizcaya; Regional Ministry of Agriculture

Diputación Foral Guipúzcoa; Regional Ministry of Rural

Development

Diputación Foral Álava; Regional Ministry of Environment

Diputación Foral Vizcaya; Regional Ministry of Agriculture

Diputación Foral Guipúzcoa; Regional Ministry of Rural

Development

Plan de emergencia para

incendios forestales de la

comunidad autónoma del

País Vasco

LA RIOJARegional Ministry of Tourism,

Environment and Territorial Policy; DG. Nature Environment

Regional Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Territorial Policy;

DG. Nature Environment INFOCAR

Source: Herrero, G.; Lázaro, A. (October, 2008).

Regarding public policies, those with greater incidence in wildland fire management are spatial planning and urbanism, nature conservation (especially for protected areas) and rural development. In Spain, responsibilities in these areas are mainly allocated at the regional level. Since their assumption in the 80s, most part of the Autonomous Regions (AR) have developed these policies as an instrument for reinforcing their political identity which has been translated in a differentiated management within their own territory.7.3-1-40-1000 Page 39 of 88

The regulatory framework affecting these policies is relatively new and has been formulated at the same administrative level almost simultaneously. This process has been developed in absence of important conflicts regarding responsibilities, which has allowed an adequate territorial intervention from the regional administrative level. However, planning instruments and spatial management in itself evidence great difficulties for setting integrated approaches and, in general, incapacity to promote positive synergies through an adequate cross-sectoral coordination between policies.

Territorial policies with incidence in wildland fire management assume and defend their possibilities for intervention upon wildfire risk reduction and its effects, but at the same time, they accept their subsidiary character in relation to forest and/or civil protection policies. They do not formulate their own principles for wildfire risk management but support the intervention of forest administrations, either: i) granting legal effectiveness to the regulation of different type of uses and activities derived from forest policies (i.e. spatial planning and urbanism, nature conservation instruments for protected areas) or ii) giving financial support to preventive actions (i.e. rural development). This subsidiary character is explained due to the different administrative ability for territorial policies comparing to forest policy (well established since the 19th century) and with their own limitations for the intervention upon structural causes affecting large wildland fires: vertical and horizontal continuity in unmanaged forest covers, loss of economic profitability in forest areas, etc. There is a gap between the identification of these structural causes and the real possibilities for intervention of territorial policies. Hence, the result is the assumption of a subsidiary role, supporting an intervention stemming form forest policy.

Nonetheless, there are some important areas for intervention where territorial policies, have the potential to obtain favourable benefits. The incorporation of wildfire risk as a limiting factor for construction and edification processes in rural areas is still insufficient. There is great tolerance towards urbanization in wildlands, which entails the consideration of the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) as areas of increasing risk. Intervention from spatial planning, at the regional level, and urbanism, at the local level, should define criteria and regulations for their incorporation in the planning of new settlements in order to avoid the increase in high risk situations. Moreover, the predictable evolution of the Common Agricultural Policy towards a real rural development policy brings about important opportunities for intervention upon willand fire management: the linking of wildfire prevention objectives with local development processes (giving fuel management practices a real sustainable value for the development of rural communities); the recognition of agriculture’s territorial role in wildfire prevention; and the opportunity to take advantage of the new energetic priorities to increase the use of forest biomass, among others. Progress towards the adequate adaptation of policy measures to territorial specificities as well as greater connectivity with local circumstances and possibilities for intervention is still to come.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 40 of 88

4.3.2 Assessment of spatial planning and other territorial policies with a role in wildfire risk managementThis section includes the assessment of selected territorial policies with greater incidence upon wildland fire risk: spatial planning and urbanism policies, rural development policies and nature conservation policies in protected areas. All three of them, define intervention strategies upon territory derived from the explicit consideration of wildfire risk.

The assessment has consisted in a review of the regional regulatory framework as well as the planning instruments for all the different territorial levels were they are developed19. For both sources, the basic principles and objectives related with wildfire management as well as the foreseen actions have been identified, with special attention in coordination mechanisms with wildfire prevention management stemming from forest and civil protection policies.

A) Spatial Planning and Urbanism Policies

The consideration of natural hazards among spatial planning and urbanism policies is quite a recent issue in Spain. Since the 80s, their incorporation have progressed from the inclusion in legislation and planning instruments to represent an essential chapter on its own (Benabent, 2006). However, the generic consideration of natural hazards does not translate into a clear standardized version for all of them. In practice, spatial planning and urbanism policies find difficulties in establishing restrictions for those uses which put at risk persons and goods; on the one hand due to the existence of a complex regulatory framework (Ayala, 2000) and on the other hand, due to the lack of maps at adequate scales for locating and setting restrictions to uses during the decision-making process.

Regarding the regulatory framework, the national Urbanism Act in 199820

states that those lands affected by “natural risks as established by sectoral planning” should be declared non suitable for urbanization. Regional Acts incorporate this rule and develop its content granting spatial planning with the responsibility for its declaration at the regional/sub regional level or even to urban planning at the local scale. The definition of the areas subject to the natural risk is referred to sectoral planning (water, civil protection or

19 Within this section, results for three autonomous regions are included as an example of the assessment developed to characterize the Spanish case-study: Andalucía, Catalonia e Islas Baleares. Andalusia is an example for a regional Administration where prevention and suppression responsibilities fall within the same regional Ministry: Catalonia, on the contrary, both responsibilities depend on two different services: Forest Administration and Civil Protection Service. The Balearic Islands are presented as a best-practice example.

20 National Urbanistic Regime Act ( 6/1998) B.O.E 14/4/1998. After the amendment of this Act in 2007, some progress has been achieved by incorporating the obligation to develop natural hazards cartography for the justification of new urban development process (Law, 8/2007. BOE 29/5/2007).

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 41 of 88

forest policies) which should delimit these areas through their mapping. However, in absence of cartographic information on these issues, territorial planning may intervene under precautionary principle upon the definition of affected areas.

In short, the delimitation for areas subject to natural risks (and land use planning associated to these) depends on risk mapping developed by the different sectoral Administrations, and only subsidiarily by territorial planning. In particular for wildland fires, Forest Services are in charge for the development of wildfire risk mapping. These maps usually establish a gradation in terms of probability of wildfire initiation during a certain period of time. Hence, the result is a map based on prevention needs (management of forest cover, infrastructure development, allocation of resources etc.) which tries to be used for a purpose for which it has not been created (land use planning).

Regarding the type of natural hazards, their consideration in regulatory and planning instruments within spatial planning is not even. While some risks, such as floods and erosion, are commonly considered in both sources, wildfire risks are not always considered, even in those areas with high incidence for this type of events. In any case, wildfire consideration in territorial planning stems from two main principles for intervention:

- The will to incorporate sustainability aims, which entails favouring a sensible and rational use of the territory, through the application of the preventive protection principle established in legislation.

- The incorporation of risk mapping deriving from sectoral planning (water, civil protection, wildland fires etc.) as an instrument to regulate uses and activities inherent to the territory.

The development of both principles though spatial planning give rise to a deep upset between the importance given to wildfires in the assessment, diagnosis, and objectives stages, and the scarce effectiveness obtained through the proposed planning (inadequate or inexistent risk mapping developed by sectoral planning).

In short, there is a clear predominance of “soft law” instruments compared to binding determinations, as it usually happens with forest lands consideration within Spatial Planning policies and not only for those issues related to wildfires (Montiel & Galiana, 2005). Hence, for example, in the region of Andalusia the Spatial Plan for Andalusia (2006) develops an integrated view for risks at the regional level, with a detailed diagnosis on the underlying causes of wildfire initiation and propagation, defining a strategic priority for the establishment of territorial criteria for wildfire prevention. Sub regional plans also take into consideration wildfires in their assessment and diagnosis, but they just reproduce rules stemming from forest legislation not as a precautionary measure upon high risk areas (See Table 2).

In general, spatial planning instruments identify, characterize and in some cases map risks, in order to be developed by local or sectoral plans through the establishment of preventive or palliative measures. Frequently, they

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 42 of 88

merely incorporate objectives considered by the sectoral plan, in coordination with the proposed territorial model. As an example, in Catalonia, subregional spatial plans refer to the General Forest Plan (1994) for wildland fire management related issues (See Table 2). Thus, based on the territorial criteria and risk mapping established by the sectoral plan, local planning should consider vulnerabilities inherent to the territory though the precise delimitation of risk areas as well as through the definition of protection and prevention measures.

The Balearic Islands represent the best practice example for the incorporation of wildfire risk in spatial planning, in particular Menorca’s Spatial Plan (2004). The regional plan states the will to reduce damages caused by risks through the incorporation of regulatory measures upon rural land uses and the development of adequate criteria for construction, infrastructure development, etc. However is in the insular level where these issues are developed in detail. The island of Menorca, even though wildfire incidence is not very important, it is specially considered within the plan. It establishes a relation between the predictable evolution of wildfires and the abandonment process of agricultural sites affecting the island. Hence, the prevention strategy is mainly based in the promotion of agricultural and forestry best practices and in the incorporation of proposals established by the Risk Management Plan (Civil Protection). However, its main contribution is land use planning in rural areas through the establishment of protection risk areas (See Table 2).

Thus, spatial planning has the potential to define an appropriate territorial model to achieve a sensible management in relation to wildland fires. However, territorial planning lacks substantiveness and has a subsidiary character compared to sectoral policies responsible for wildfire management (Forest and Civil Protection). Sometimes, the development of land use priorities (i.e.: restrictions to urban settlements dispersion along the territory) translate into a less vulnerable model for wildfire risk (i.e. subregional spatial plans in Catalonia); but wildfire risk prevention does not figure among the reasons which justify this option.

Spatial Planning and Urbanism contribution is mainly the legal effectiveness stemming from their responsibilities (land use planning) derived from the application of forest and/or civil protection legislation. On the contrary, there are few references to the relation between the regulation of forestry uses and the risk introduced by the settlement system (i.e. Cantabria), which causes uncertainty about the efficiency of these measures. The main problem, as previously identified, is the absence of an appropriate cartography for wildfire risk, which means being elaborated according to spatial planning objectives and not based only in wildfire prevention and suppression objectives, thus building the basis for the definition of a territorial model (land use planning) having into consideration wildfire risk.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 43 of 88

Table 2. LEGISLATION AND SPATIAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION REGULATIONS PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION OF WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUCIA

Spatial Planning Act (1/1994, BOE February 9th of 1994)

Urban Planning Act (7/2002, December 17th of 2002)

Spatial Plan for Andalusia (BOJA December 29th 2006)

- Integrated view for risks at the regional level

- Diagnosis about wildland fire initiation and propagation

- Priorities:

• Establishment of territorial criteria for wildland fire prevention

• Development of cartography for decision-making processes regarding location and limitation of the different types of uses (stemming from Civil Protection)

• Precautionary measures (in absence of risk mapping): sub regional spatial planning plans and municipal urban plans “will identify areas within their territory of high risk for wildland fires”

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 44 of 88

Table 2. LEGISLATION AND SPATIAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION REGULATIONS PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION OF WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUCIA

Idem Spatial Subregional Plans (approved):

Aglomeración Urbana de Granada

Poniente de Almería Sierra de Segura (Jaén) Bahía de Cádiz Àmbito de Doñana Litoral occidental de

Huelva Costa del Sol occidental

(Málaga) Litoral oriental-Axarquía

(Málaga)

- Assessment and diagnosis for the structural causes affecting wildland fires (related to the organization and dynamics for uses inherent to the territory)

- They do not take precautionary actions upon sensible wildfire risk areas, which are not even identified and mapped (this is done for other type of risks: tsunamis, coastal erosion, storms, floods)

- Forest Legislation implementation: protection easement of 25 m around forest areas where construction is not allowed

General Territorial Plan (Law 1/1995,March 16th; amended by Law 24/2001, December 31st )

Not considered

Table 2. LEGISLATION AND SPATIAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 45 of 88

REGION REGULATIONS PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION OF WILDLAND FIRE RISK

CATALONIA

Spatial Planning Policy Act (23/1983, November 21st of 1983)

Spatial Subregional Plans:

- Pla Territorial Parcial de les Terres de l'Ebre (2001)

- Pla Territorial Parcial de l’Alt Pirineu i Arán (2006)

- Pla Territorial Parcial Comarques Centrals (Dfrat, 2006)

- Pla Territorial Parcial de Ponent (First approval 2006)

- Pla Territorial de les Comarques gironines

- Pla Territorial del Camp de Tarragona

- Pla Territorial de l’ambit

Diagnosis.

- A significant part of the open spaces located forest areas are under vulnerable situation towards wildfires. There is a lack of appropriate forest policy. Elaboration of forest management plans.

Land use planning

- Areas affected by natural risks are integrated in an open space system (land not suitable for development): left aside from urbanization processes and intensive activities) due to the territorial function they fulfil, together with other high valued areas (i.e.: biodiversity, productivity), areas rich in natural resources or those included due to their location in the territory (i.e.: strategic areas)

- These areas are included in the system with the category protected lands, these are areas which are not appropriate for urban development due to probability of risk incidence (floods, geologic risks), landscape values and/or ecologic criteria. Areas under this category should be maintained by urban planning.

Coordination with other sectoral interventions

- Management for forest areas will be developed by the General Forest Plan, which considers specific actions referred to wildland fire risk and the rehabilitation of burned areas.

- Urban planning should consider those vulnerabilities inherent to the territory which might entail potential risks (floods, wildfires, industrial and mining waste disposal). It should define precisely those areas at risk (floods, geologic risks) and establish specific prevention and protection measures.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 46 of 88

metropolità de Barcelona

Table 2. LEGISLATION AND SPATIAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION REGULATIONSPLANNING

INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION OF WILDLAND FIRE RISK

BALEARIC ISLANDS

Spatial Planning Act (14/2000)

Law 2/2001, May 7th, allocating responsibilities for spatial planning to the Regional Ministries

Plan Territorial Insular de Menorca (2003)

Plan Territorial Insular de Mallorca (2004)

Plan Territorial Insular de Ibiza y Formentera (2005)

Diagnosis

- Consideration of natural risks: special reference to wildland fires (together with floods and landslides).

- Integral diagnosis for rural development and for the consequences of agricultural abandonment for wildfire incidence.

Proposals

- Wildfire prevention (i.e. wildfires, erosion, landslides). Elaboration of strategies at the insular level.

- Promotion of agricultural and forestry best practices in order to decrease wildfire risk (maintenance of stone fences, lanes and fire lanes, well restoration, financial support for forest and agri-environmental programs in order to manage fuel accumulations in forest areas)

- Incorporation and development of proposals stemming from the Risk Managament Plan.

Land use planning

- Protection Risk Areas (APR) (Map 1/25.000), identified and delimited by the regional spatial plan, and included in the protected rural areas category (left aside from urban development). Those areas with medium or high wildfire risk are included.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 47 of 88

- Establishment of the conditions for land use planning in APR. Especially for recreational activities and complementary uses to agricultural activities in wildfire risk areas (as considered by forest legislation)

Author: L. GALIANA

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 48 of 88

B) Nature Conservation Policies. Consequences for Protected Areas

Since the 80s, most of the responsibilities related with the management of forest and natural areas fall within the regional level, while the State preserves the responsibility for establishing the basic legal framework and the general objectives for forest policies, among which Autonomous Regions can develop theirs (Alcanda, 2004). At the national level, the Law 4/89 for the Conservation of Protected Areas, Flora and Fauna, sets the guidelines from where the Autonomous Regions have built or adapted the regional network for protected areas, being one of its fundamental contributions the establishment of the Natural Resource Management Plans (PORN) as a basic planning instrument . Decentralized management upon these issues have favoured a differentiation between the different regional networks, especially in terms of figures for protection and planning instruments. Among the wide variety of regional plans, the PORN and the planning instrument which implements its guidelines, the Land Use and Natural Resource Management Actions Plan (PRUG), are the ones with greater incidence in wildland fire management, since among their objectives are: i) determine limitations which should be established depending on the level of conservation, ii) identifying the adequate protection regimes, iii) promote the implementation of conservation, restoration and improvement measures for those natural resources in need, iv) formulate the guiding principles for sectoral policies as well as economic and social activities, both private and public, in order to guarantee these are compatible with conservation needs.Hence, in Andalusia, wildfire legislation refers to the essential role of PORNs for wildfire prevention. Moreover, this autonomous region has two other planning instruments which include the consideration of wildfire risk, with potential to exert support in wildfire prevention: i) Regarding risk prediction, the Sustainable Development Plans, according to the Risk Management Plan, should consider risk management among their implementation measures, and ii) the General Environmental Plan (2004-2010), constitutes a new planning figure which defines the environmental policy for the region during the next six years and in this context recognize the problem that wildfires pose upon their natural environment through their inclusion in a specific program for wildfires (See Table 3).

In Catalonia, legislation related with protected areas establish the need to create a specific wildfire prevention plans for these areas which should be integrated into the management plan of the protected area, the latter are called Planes Especiales de Protección. These specific wildfire prevention plans usually consider: the characterization of the forest cover and its zoning regarding wildfire risk, the distribution of defensive and vial infrastructures as well as preventive measures to be adopted. Their incorporation into the general plan for the management of the protected area is similar than in the PORNS, through their inclusion in the general planning adopted through guiding principles and rules affecting activities with risk for wildfire initiation and sometimes, favouring their implementation defining specific measures within their intervention programs (See Table 3).

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 49 of 88

From the analysis of the regional planning instruments relative to nature conservation and the environment, it is possible to conclude, that intervention upon wildland fire management is merely limited to the prevention stage and in particular:

- Favour the implementation of sectoral legislation and plans (forest and/or civil protection), promoting guiding principles and rules affecting activities with incidence in wildfire risk (i.e.: forestry, livestock grazing, infrastructures and recreational activities).

- Permit the development of the necessary tasks for wildfire prevention and suppression, which otherwise could not be carried out within the limits of protected areas.

- Represent an additional source for funding to achieve wildfire prevention objectives shared with forest policy, through the inclusion of this type of measures in their implementation plans.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 50 of 88

Table 3. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING INSTRUMENTS ON NATURE CONSERVATION. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION LEGISLATION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUSIA

Protected Areas Inventory Act (2/1989, 18th of July

Planes de Ordenación de Recursos Naturales (PORN)

Planes Rectores de Uso y Gestión (PRUG)

Programas de Uso Público (PUP)

The regional act 5/99 for Wildfire Prevention and Suppression establishes: the planning of the preventive measures in forest areas should be included in the PORN. In particular, the Decree 247/2001 Regulation for the Prevention and Suppression of Wildfires, sets the contents where wildfire’s issues should be included:

Diagnosis and evaluation Definition of objectives Rules (guiding principles and regulation upon activities) Establishment of measures and economic and financial

assessment

In practice, these instruments consider wildfires mainly in the incorporation of preventive criteria into the guiding principles and regulatory actions upon natural resources planning and sectoral activities which might entail risk for wildfire initiation (i.e.: forest management, agrarian activities and electric infrastructures).

Through the PRUGs, some protected areas have included specific prevention measures within a generic conservation program (i.e. P.N Doñana, Plan for the conservation and restoration of biodiversity and landscape: elaboration and implementation of plans aimed at the maintenance of defensive infrastructures)

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 51 of 88

Table 3. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING INSTRUMENTS ON NATURE CONSERVATION. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION LEGISLATION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUSIA

Planes de Desarrollo Sostenible (PDS)

Emergency Management Act in Andalusia(2/2002), set the need for PDS, to compile principles established within the Plan Territorial de Emergencias de Andalusia and thus the incorporation of risk consideration into measures and actions. Among the natural and anthropogenic risks figure wildland fires.

In practice, depending on the area, usually wildfire risk is only considered in the diagnosis, others they are incorporated into specific measures and group of actions (i.e. P.N Sierra Nevada: investigation causes in order to guide future prevention measures, creation of participatory mechanisms such as ADFs, elaboration of local plans for urbanizations, planes locales de autoprotección)

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 52 of 88

Plan de Medio Ambiente de Andalucía (2004-2010)

Among forest programs defined within the plan, one of the subprograms is specifically directed to wildland fires: Program 14.3 Wildland Fire Control, which includes objectives, strategies and specific preventive measures supporting forest legislation and planning.

Table 3. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING INSTRUMENTS ON NATURE CONSERVATION. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION LEGISLATION PLANNING

INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 53 of 88

CATALONIA

Protected Areas Act (12/1985, June 13th

of 1985).

Decree for the establishment of wildfire prevention plan in protected areas (378/1986, December 18th of 1986)

Decree which approves the Special Plans of Natural Interest (328/1992, December 14th of 1992)

Planes de Ordenación de Recursos Naturales (PORN)

Planes de Especial Interés Natural (PEIN)

Planes especiales de protección

Planes especiales de delimitación

The Decree 378/1986 establishes the need for the creation of specific wildfire prevention plans adequate for the nature of protected areas. Its basic content is the following art.1):

Location and characterization of forest cover within the limits of protected areas

Location and description of access roads to forest areas Zoning regarding the index of wildfire danger Water resouce infrastructures Allocation of defensive infrastructures and personnel Development of preventive measures

These plans should be included into the general management plan of the protected areas (Planes Especiales de Protección), which following the guiding principles established by Decree consider the following elements:

- In the Diagnosis: in some cases these plans dedicate a specific chapter to wildfires

- In the General Land Use Planning, adopted through the adoption of specific determinations regarding wildfire prevention:

Establishment of guiding principles for forest management l Recreational activities management (i.e. access to motored vehicles) Foreseen restoration of agriculture to fulfil wildfire prevention objectives

- In the Implementation Programs, among which there are some management actions aimed at wildfire prevention (i.e.: Promote the elaboration of forest management plans in private properties, wildfire prevention plans)

Table 3. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING INSTRUMENTS ON NATURE CONSERVATION. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION LEGISLATION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

BALEARIC ISLANDS

Conservation of Special Areas due

Planes de Ordenación de Recursos Naturales (PORN)

Regulations only consider wildfire issues in the section dedicated to the sanctions related with the inappropriate use of fire (without permit or in

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 54 of 88

to their Environmental Relevance (LECO) Act (5/2005, May 26th of 2005).

Protected Areas and Urbanistic Regimes in Special Protection Areas Act (1/1991)

Planes Rectores de Uso y Gestión (PRUG)

forbidden areas)

In practice, the PORN and PRUGs consider wildland fires mainly in the incorporation of wildland fire prevention criteria in guiding principles and regulatory actions upon natural resources planning and sectoral activities which might entail risk for wildfire initiation (i.e.: forest management, agrarian activities and electric infrastructures).

The refer to forest (and civil protection) legislation and planning (i.e.: determinations from local defence plans), although some of these plans propose measures which differentiate them from other regions:

- Within rules focused in the regulation of forestry activities (i.e.: Preventive measures in wildland-urban interface, PN Cala d´Hort)

- Within rules focused in the regulation of agricultural activities (i.e.: agricultural ploughing in order to achieve wildfire defence objectives, P.N Levante)

- Issues included in general rules to specific areas: measures to be promoted (i.e. In areas of special conservation values, promote the extensive grazing livestock in order to prevent wildfires, P.N Cala d´Hort )

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 55 of 88

C) Rural Development Policies

Towards the end of the 80s, the guiding principles for rural development were established in Europe and are maintained till the date. At the same time, structural funds where affected by a reform which caused an important increase in the budget destined to regional policy (especially for objective 1 regions, among which great part of the Spanish territory was included). Hence, autonomous regions have since the 90s important economic resources for the development of rural development policies, which give them wide opportunities for intervention upon their territories. In particular, regional rural development programs are considered as an opportunity for funding their wildfire prevention policies. Nowadays, in Spain the main contribution of the rural development policy to wildland fire risk management is the financial support in prevention tasks and in the provision of suppression resources.

The assessment of consecutive rural development programs carried out by the different autonomous regions evidence how wildfire risk management is incorporated gradually into the objectives of Rural Development Programs (RDP), coordinated with the regional forest policy and intervention plans upon wildfire risk. This incorporation, which is made since the very first plans considered in a generic way is formalized in the RDP for the period 2000-2006, with different types of financial support measures for wildland fire prevention:

- Development of prevention plans; wildland fire training; promotion for research studies.

- Preventive measures upon the forest cover, especially in high risk areas (thinning, brush out, fuel break, fire belt, livestock grazing).

- Creation and maintenance of defensive infrastructures (fire lane, water sources).

- Promotion of forest defence associations (ADFs): foundation and resources.

- Afforestation of forest lands affected by wildfires At the same time, wildfire risk consideration widened to other type of measures, not directly related, which can exert negative influence. Hence, in some occasions sanction measures are established (i.e.: suppression of funding for those situations where prevention plans are not followed), and in others, exceptions are admitted for those actions defined with the aim of decreasing wildfire risk in high risk areas (stubble preservation in high risk areas).

The National Strategic Plan for Rural Development 2007-2013, main instrument within the FEADER program, is applied trough the regional rural development programs carried out by the autonomous regions. The plan considers wildfire prevention as one of its priorities for intervention. Hence, it has established an horizontal measure (compulsory implementation for all the State) specific for wildland fire prevention. This plan, establishes two different management actions, in coherence with Regional Forest Plans:

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 56 of 88

- Preventive actions in forest covers, aimed to improve the conservation, diversity, structure and composition of forest systems, through preventive silviculture and measures to favour discontinuity.

- Defensive infrastructures (fire lanes, water resources, detection infrastructures, etc,).

Together with these direct measures, are also included a wide variety of indirect actions. Hence, in some spatial planning contracts established for the payment of agri-environmental measures incentives for biodiversity management or rural landscape maintenance, appear duties which are related with wildfire prevention objectives:

- Ecological corridors in dry farm cereal lands (leguminous, alfalfa) which besides exerting a positive influence for fauna might be consider as fire breaks. RDP Aragón.

- Maintenance of stone fences, due to their heritage value and their role as fire belts. RDP Baleares.

- Afforestation of agricultural and non-agricultural lands (open and low density stands). RDP Aragón.

- Restoration of abandoned rangelands. RDP Castilla y León.- Maintenance and promotion of native species (extensive livestock

grazing in forest covers). RDP Navarra.In short, forest and wildfire defence plans have found an important financial support in rural development policies; without it, none of the investments efforts carried out during the last years would have been possible. Likewise, the positive influence that rural development policies have had in rural areas should be considered. The promotion of economic activities and job opportunities to reverse rural abandonment has been on of its main contribution, one of the structural actions for wildland fires.

However, experiences comprising new spatial planning formulas for wildland fire risk reduction in the long term are quite exceptional. Thus, great part of the preventive measures proposed upon forest covers, once executed have not been maintained and lost their effectiveness (fire breaks, fire lines). They are appropriate actions from the technical point of view but lack a linking with sustainable economic activities which are a guarantee for their maintenance. Only exceptionally, the lack of bonding between rural development and civil society has been overcame. In these occasions, support for integral local development experiences has had positive consequences in the decrease of wildfire incidence. For example, in Allariz (Galicia, Spain) a new model for natural resource management has been established, including the conversion of abandoned agricultural lands into rangelands for sustainable livestock production in agro-forestal systems and forest biomass as a renewable source for electric energy. These actions are inseparable from strategic local economic development (agro alimentary activities, rural tourism) and the effort in the management of the existing territorial heritage.

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 57 of 88

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 58 of 88

Table 4. RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUSIA

LEADER Initiative (1991-1993) NO

LEADER II Initiative (1994-1999) NO

PRODER (1996-1999) Generic consideration: “Assure the conservation of the natural environment and its resources, though an adequate harmonized use of its functions: productive, protective and recreative”

Local Development Programs in Rural Areas in Andalusia(PRODER DE ANDALUCÍA) (2000-2006)

Financial support for the development of forest policies

- Funding for the elaboration of wildfire prevention plans; preventive measures (creation, improvement and maintenance of fire breaks, fire lines, and water resources) ; afforestation in forest lands affected by wildfires; silvicultural actions (thinning, brush out, pruning, etc. ); foundation and maintenance of forest defence associations (ADFs)

- Suppression of fundings for those situations where prevention and restoration plans are not followed.

Plan de Modernización de la Agricultura Andaluza (2000-2006)

- Support for agriculture maintenance in marginal areas from the economic point of view (dehesa) due to their contribution for the reduction of wildfire risk.

- Consideration of the role of agriculture in spatial planning

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 59 of 88

Table 4. RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

ANDALUSIA

Regional Program LEADER + de Andalucía

NO

Programa de Desarrollo Rural de Andalucía. Avance (2007-2013)

Opportunity for agri-environmental measures to favour an appropriate protection regarding willand fire risk.

- Increase of forests’ economic value. Enhance the creation of associations among forest owners in order to favour wild land fire defence measures.

- Funding for the first establishment of agroforestal systems in agricultural lands, which combine extensive farm and forest management (mainly dehesas, hedges) according to Wildfire Prevention Plans and Defence Strategies (stand designs which favour discontinuities in forest covers, forests in mosaic, livestock grazing in forest areas)

- Funding for forest areas. Forest and environmental commitments

- Funding for forest potential restoration and preventive measures establishment.

Table 4. RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 60 of 88

REGION PLANNING INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

CATALONIA

Programa de desenvolupament rural (2000-2006)

Financial support for the development of forest and wildland fire policies

- Premises: improvement of forest covers and wildfire prevention activities are a priority to be developed during this period. Incorporation of protection perimeters in those settlements located in forest areas, to be Developer by local stakeholders.

- Funding for activities:

o Defensive infrastructures measures aimed to reduce fuel accumulation and break vertical and horizontal continuity of forest covers. 31 areas with high risk for large wildfires or PPP (Prioritary Protection Perimeters).

o Foundation and maintenance of forest defence associations (ADFs) o Restoration of forest ecosystems affected by natural disasters, in particular wildfire.

(i.e.: intervention upon vegetation in order to favour regeneration as well as upon soil to avoid the loss of fertility during the three subsequent years)

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 61 of 88

Table 4. RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING. WILDLAND FIRE RISK MANAGEMENT

REGIONPLANNING

INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERATION FOR WILDLAND FIRE RISK

BALEARIC ISLANDS

Programa de Desarrollo Rural Sostenible 2000-2006

Diagnosis: Wildfires are considered an important enviromental threat, and wildfire prevention policies are not obtaining the expected results. The maintenance of agricultura is one of the potential solutions

Measures: Contribute to the sustainability of forest covers and support

- Reduce fuel accumulation to decrease the risk of propagation; regenerate the forest cover affected by wildland fires; develop preventive silviculture.

- Encourage private forest owners to develop the local defence plans (i.e. construction of water resource infrastructures)

Plan de Desarrollo Rural de Illes Balears (2007-2013)

A program with strong environmental character

- Wildfires and soil degradation are considered as the main environmental problems. Wildfire prevention has become one of the strategic objectives.

- Enhance the maintenance of agriculture due to positive influences for landscape, erosion control or wildfire risk reduction. Measures aimed to the maintenance of agricultural landscapes; fences; etc.

- Maintenance of forest areas included in Natura 2000 Financial support for the development of forest and wildfire policies

- Location of water resource infrastructures within the territory, access improvement to forest areas

Incorporation of wildfire defence objectives in other management actions

Afforestation of agricultural lands; Promotion of fire-resilient forest covers; No afforestation in high risk areas

7.3-1-40-1000 Page 62 of 88

4.3.3 Strengths and weaknesses of territorial policies regarding Integrated Wildland Fire Management in the national/regional context.

Based on the results obtained in the assessment of the effects that territorial policies have upon wildland fire management in Spain, next the main strengths and weaknesses identified throughout the case-study, both at the national and regional level, are comprised in the table below.

STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES

Increasing establishment of a Security Culture: intervention upon a risk should be developed under all possibilities and at any moment.

Territorial policies assume and defend their possibilities for intervention, though the incorporation of specific wildland fire aims and measures.

Responsibilities for wildfire prevention and those related with territorial policies, fall within the same administrative level: the autonomous regions.

Recent regulatory and planning framework, developed almost simultaneously and without important responsibility conflicts

Complementarily, different territorial policies with incidence in wildfire management have the potential to influence structural causes affecting wildfires.

The predominant role forest policies in wildland fire management entails the subsidiary role adopted by territorial policies handling this issues

o They do not formulate their own and differentiated principles for wildfire management

o Problems to adopt integrated and agreed approaches

o Unable to multiply positive effects through an adequate policy coordination

In practice, possibilities for intervention upon structural causes affecting wildfires are limited. Gap between objectives and measures finally established.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 63 of 88

STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES

Regarding spatial planning and urbanism policies, they have the potential to effectively intervene upon one of the most important causes increasing wildfire risk: scattered settlements in forest areas (regulations setting restrictions to constructions in high risk or sensible areas, appropriate criteria for settlements and infrastructures, etc.)

The will to establish limitations to land uses in order to decrease the exposure of people and goods, face the problem of a complex legal framework which difficult its implementation.

Absence of appropriate mapping for wildfire risk, at the adequate scales, for decision making regarding identification and limitation to land uses. Difficult implementation (based on prevention and, above all, suppression objectives)

Wildfire risk is considered as a limiting factor for land use management and activities, but in less proportion compared to other natural risks (floods, erosion)

Scattered settlements in forest areas constitute a highly vulnerable structure difficult to manage. Two important factors contribute to this problem: I) the high level of autonomy existing for urbanistic responsibilities and ii) the increasing indiscipline of constructions developed in rural lands.

Protected areas management favours the implementation of forest and civil protection legislation and planning, through the incorporation of preventive objectives in the definition of guiding principles and rules for activities which might entail risk for wildfire incidence (i.e. forestry, livestock activities, infrastructures, recreational activities)

Funding for nature conservation management in protected areas constitutes an additional source for the development of wildfire prevention objectives, complementary to those established by Forest and Civil Protection

Some of the principles stemming from Nature Conservation policies, might be in contradiction with actions defined in the frame of wildfire management.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 64 of 88

policies, through their inclusion in general implementation programs.

STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES

The evolution of the CAP towards a real rural development policy, in which wildland fire management is gradually being considered as an important priority.

Rural development policies contribute to wildland fire management though the financial support of prevention and suppression tasks.

Wildfire management is included among the objectives of Rural Development Programs, in coordination with regional forest policies and risk management plans

The National Rural Development Plan 2007-2013, main instrument within the FEADER program, considers wildfire prevention as one of its priorities for intervention.

Wildfire risk is increasingly considered in other type of interventions upon rural areas (agri-environmental measures) which have the potential to contribute in decreasing this risk.

Support for local development initiatives of integral character (forest management, agro alimentary industries, rural tourism and heritage) have positive consequences in diminishing wildfire risk incidence.

New energetic priorities in Europe, in which renewable energies (i.e. forest biomass) play an important role, might have important positive impacts for rural development in certain areas, as well as facilitating the development of fuel management activities.

The important that the national and regional framework have in the definition of rural development measures, difficult and adequate adaptation to the territorial specificities and possibilities for intervention.

In practice, rural development experiences with real incidence in reducing wildfire risk, capable carrying on in the long term though promotion of forest lands management, are exceptional.

Great part of preventive measures developed within rural development programs, once executed have not been maintained, thus, loosing their effectiveness (fire breaks, fire lines). These interventions are technically correct but lack the necessary linking to sustainable economic activities capable of maintaining those measures.

Rural Development Policies, lack of bonding with local realities, which enables establishing measures based upon regional specificities. Only exceptionally, this weakness has been overcome.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 65 of 88

4.4 The Moroccan study case

4.4.1 Wildland fire management in Morocco: Institutional framework

4.4.1.1 Forest Legislation

Since its creation in Morocco in the second decade of the last century, the Forest Service has to deal with the problem of forest fires. Much before the coming of the forest legislation into effect, the Circular of 1917 August 20 has defined different measures to be taken in order to prevent, to combat and to repress forest fires. It has focused on the prevention of forest fires through public awareness, the prediction by inviting the local forest service to open forest sites for local workers who would be willing to help to combat any local forest fires, and on the fire fighting, specifying the procedures to follow.

The Forest Law, issued at 1917 October 10, emphasized on the same measures. Its basic principles are:

• The prohibition to carry or to light fire outside homes and farm buildings, inside and within a distance of 200m from timbers and forests. From first of May to October 31, this prohibition is applied even to the forest owners, and extends to the vegetal plant distillation (essential oils and resin), and generally to all industrial activities that require fire use.

• The setting of provisions related to building constructions near forests, railways and roads through forests.

• The requisitioning of persons in case of disasters. In this case, the local resident populations should participate to forest fire fighting under pain of collective fine in case of their lack of goodwill.

• The regulation of grazing within fired timbers.

• The condemnation of the forest fire makers.

This law was completed by the Vizier Decree of 1918 September 4 related to the measures to be taken to prevent forest fires. These measures are:

• The setting of a fire season period of four months, from the first of July to October 31, during which, some precautions must be taken with regard to the use of fire in homes, camps, sites in forest or within the area of 200m width along the edge of forests.

• The setting of measures to be observed for ground clearing along railways and against incineration of brushes, grasses and stubbles in private lands located in the nearby of forests.

4.4.1.2. The law relative to the civil protection

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 66 of 88

The law of 1955 April 30 related to civil protection shows a triple benefit with concern to forest fire management:

• It sets down a framework disaster prevention organization since it clarifies that even the finality of the civil protection is to implement and coordinate assistance in case of any important disaster;

• It points out the responsible authorities for implementation and coordination of disaster prevention: At the national level, the Prime Minister determines the global policy in this area. This policy is implemented by the Ministry of Interior. At the provincial level, the governor remains the responsible authority for the preparation, the conduction, the control of the organization and of the implementation of measures for civil protection;

• It sets down the bases of solidarity when fighting against sinister and disasters. Indeed, this text urges different ministerial departments to take into consideration the civil protection mandatory from one side and public services, municipalities, institutions and private organizations to contribute to attenuate sinister and disaster effects from the other side.

This law was completed by the Decree relative to the attributions and organization of the Ministry of Interior. This Decree stipulates that the civil protection is in charge of the protection and the defense of the civilian population and goods in all circumstances. To this fact, it has, among others as task, to organize, animate and coordinate the implementation of the measures for protecting and rescuing persons and goods during calamitous events and disasters, promote prevention of risks and to fight against any sinister, particularly fires. This intends that civil protection service has a wide task, integrating all disasters, including forest fires.

In this context, the Civil Protection Directorate acts for the elaboration of circulars which are sent to Walis and governors of provinces of the country in order to remind the required dispositions to consider for prevention and fighting against forest fires with involvement of different concerned provincial structures (Forest Service, Equipment Service, Auxiliary Forces, Royal Gendarmerie, Civil Protection, local authorities ...).

4.4.1.3. The Communal charter

The law no. 78.00 relative to the communal charter, promulgated by the Decree of 2002 October 3, allows the communal board to regulate, through its deliberation decisions, the community affairs. To this fact, it is enabled to decide about measures to take to ensure the economic, social and cultural development of the community. Among its self competencies:

• It decides, within the limits of its attributions devolved to it by law, about the conditions of conservation, forest exploitation and development of forestry.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 67 of 88

• It examines and adopts the communal regulations of constructions according to the legislation and the rules in force.

• It decides about the creation and management of the communal public services, notably in the matter of collection, transport, public garbage dump and treatment of household rubbish and assimilated wastes.

•It watches over the public hygiene preservation, healthiness and environmental protection. To this fact, it deliberates notably on communal policy regarding forest protection.

• It undertakes any of the nature proximity actions to mobilize citizens, to develop the collective consciousness for the public benefit, to organize their participation to the life quality improvement and to the environment preservation. As such, it is in charge to conduct any actions of sensitization, communication, information and development of participation and partnership with the local associations and with any of the organizations or moral or physical persons active in the socio-economical and cultural area.

• It engages any actions of cooperation, association or partnership that promote economical development. To this end, it decides on the creation or the participation to any group of inter-communal interest at prefectural, provincial or regional level.

4.4.2. National strategy of forest protection against fires The following plans constitute the main supports of the national strategy of forest protection against fires:

4.4.2.1. The FOREC plan

This plan is intended to handle the measures of prevention and prediction to be taken in order to attenuate the forest and harvest crop fire severity. Starting from generalities, it focuses on the causes and the propagation of fires; then, it underlines the measures to be taken for both prediction and extinction of fires. Also, through circular letters, the plan defines the role of firefighters and of the authority agents. However, given the upsurge of fires, especially with the record number of 1983, it was revealed that it becomes imperative to update this Plan.

4.4.2.2. The Master Plan against Fires (PDCI) of the Rif forest region

Within the cooperation framework between Morocco and the Autonomous Government of Andalusia, EGMASA, an Andalusian studies Agency has made, since 1999, a Master Plan for fighting against forest fires in Rif forest area that regroups the provinces of Chefchaouen, Tetouan, Larache and Tangier. This project expected, beside the plan implementation, the purchase of 25 vehicles for emergency operations and the training of 40 forest firemen. Also, the plan had foreseen the implementation of a structure comprising:

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 68 of 88

• A regional operational center.

• Provincial operational centers.

• Territorial unities for monitoring and fire suppression (one unity for each Forest Development Center).

This PDCI is partially implemented because the operational centers are not operational yet.

4.4.2.3. The National Master Plan (PDCI)

a. The interdepartmental committee

Since the implementation of the FOREC Plan in 1960, the wildfires have damaged about 114.000 ha of forests. In this context, it has become necessary to deploy more efforts through setting an effective prevention network, a fast warning system and sufficient and effective intervention means. For this purpose, an interdepartmental committee was created in the year 2000 in view to prepare a Master Plan for Prevention and Fight against forest fires (PDCI). This committee comprises different departments concerned by forest fires such as Interior Ministry, Forest Department, Transport and Equipment Ministry, Royal Gendarmerie, Civil Protection Service, Land Conservation Service, National Meteorology and Development Agency for the North provinces of Morocco.

After the nomination of this interdepartmental committee, a circular letter from the Ministry of Interior (September 13, 2000) entrusted to provincial committees to analyze the present situation on the field and to define the exact actions to be scheduled in order to elaborate the following documents:

• The mapping of forest stands according to three fire risk classes (high, moderate and low).

• The description of existing infrastructures (rural and urban agglomerations, roads, tracks, lookout towers, firebreaks, airports, etc.).

• Infrastructure to achieve or to build up.

• Technical forms for the equipment to be realized.

The PDCI plan, elaborated by MECEF, was implemented since 2001. It defines the national strategy of prevention and fighting against wildfires and had laid down the tasks for each department involved in forest fires, taking into account the statutory competences of each intervening party and its capacities to fulfill its attributed duties. Regular committee meetings permit to know the progress state of different plan programs and to decide about the actions to be undertaken (especially in matter of coordination) in order D7.1-1.1-0001

Page 69 of 88

to improve the predicting and fire fighting systems. In addition to the interdepartmental committee operating at the national level, a provincial coordination committee has been created at the level of each province and also many other local vigilance committees at the Caïdat or municipality levels.

b. The provincial coordination committee

This committee ensures, at the provincial level, the coherence and efficiency of the prevention actions, the modalities of intervention in case of fires, the logistics organization and at best the mobilization of human potential and available material. It has as assignments:

• The establishment of an operation order for the prevention and fighting against forest fires, taking into account the specificities of the province.

• The adoption of preventive measures against forest fires before the summer time period.

• The determination, in advance, of the conduct line to observe for the organization of the fighting and relief operations.

• The distribution of tasks among different intervening organs involved in fighting against forest fires.

• The setting of a fast warning design for emergency intervention of fighting teams.

• The designation of an authority unity responsible of guiding the assistance operations.

This committee, which is under the presidency of the provincial Governor, regroups the representatives of all the provincial services. It will hold meetings from the beginning of May each year for:

• The engagement of a campaign of public awareness and information in benefit of rural population before and during summer time period.

• The census and the location of all human and material means that can be mobilized for fighting against forest fire and the conditions of their use.

• The definition of a deployment strategy of the existing means and those required as reinforcements in case of need.

• The distribution of tasks among different services of the potential intervening parts. This distribution must take into account the statutory competences of each intervening part and its capacities to fulfill its attributed duties.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 70 of 88

• The establishment of an operational process that defines the conducting line for the organization of fire fighting operations in collaboration with different concerned services, taking into consideration the available means.

• The constitution and setting of advanced preventive detachments during the high risk period in order to reduce the delay time of the first interventions within forest stands that are sensible to fire. Each detachment is constituted of staff, materials and different concerned services, particularly those of civil protection and forest department (mobile units of the first intervention and assistance). The position choice of each detachment must take in consideration the sensibility of forest stand and the delay time of the intervention in every point of this forest stand.

• In case of fire, the designation of an advanced authority command post, permitting to manage and to maintain the operational capacities of the engaged means at their optimal level.

c. The local committee at the communal level

The Provincial Committee will be relayed at the Circle or Caïdat Office level by a committee composed of local representatives of technical services, including notably Forest Service and elected officials. It has for assignments:

• To strengthen the prevention actions in areas with fire risk: activation of the local committees of vigilance at the communal and forest levels. Within the framework of these committees, the communal boards and the presidents of the communes are called to exercise their power for forest protection against fires.

• To hire a staff for forest patrols.

• To make inventory of all available intervention material at the level of each concerned entity for its mobilization purpose in case of fire and to purchase, from the communal budget, usable small fighting material.

• To watch over the respect of regulatory measures with concern to fire use in the nearby of forests in summer time.

• To engage the first interventions with the help of population, as fast as the starting of fires, in waiting the reinforcement with adequate means.

4.4.3. Evaluation of other legislations and policies having a link with forest fires

4.4.3.1. The 2020 strategy of rural development

The rural development is articulated around the bringing to work of the orientation and options of the 2020 strategy of rural development, whose main objectives are:

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 71 of 88

• The increase of agricultural sector performance in order to ensure food security of the country, to multiply the job opportunities in rural area, to improve the income level of rural population and to make of agriculture the lever of the rural economy and through it the national economy.

• The diversification of rural income sources through the promotion of agricultural parallel activities and non-agricultural ones. This involves the adoption of a policy of developing small centers susceptible to reduce the gap between the cities and rural area.

• The leveling of educational and professional education systems in order to spread the knowledge among rural population (men and women). This aspect is necessary for their emancipation and the acquisition of capacities that help them to adapt to the technical progress and to modern management systems.

The achievement of these objectives will permit to increase the standard of living of the forest nearby resident populations and to decrease their claiming of lands and forest products and from there, to ensure better resource conservation.

4.4.3.2. The National Charter of territory management and sustainable development

The National Charter of territory management and durable development constitutes a reference framework that permits to bring to coherence different sector-related policies and the growth of their synergy.

The process governing its elaboration, which is based on working together, gives the charter the force of a collective agreement that engages all national components (different ministries and state departments, political parties, central trade unions, elected staff of the two parliament chambers, territorial authorities, regions, local collectivities, civil society organizations and a large number of researchers and professors) to act within the framework of the principles, the objectives and the general orientations that constitute the foundations of this charter.

The success of the national policy of the territory management, as a required step for the achievement of economical development and the preservation of environmental and social balances, is dependent on the measures to be taken and the actions to be accomplished, in order to increase the efficiency of the national economy, to develop the rural world, to rationalize the management of urban space and to promote human resources. Beyond these objectives, these measures aim to take up the challenge of competitiveness.

4.4.3.2.1. Rural Development

The charter relies on the orientations and options of the 2020 strategy of rural development (see paragraph 2.2. above)

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 72 of 88

4.4.3.2.2. Management of Resources and conservation of forest heritage

The national charter has emphasized the urgency to mobilize the resources within the framework of a global strategy whose objectives are:

• The deepening of knowing these resources in order to determine their fitness, their weakness and their animating forces. On the basis of this knowledge, concrete measures should be taken with a view to ensure their conservation and to identify the offered possibilities of their mobilization for a development purpose.

• The elaboration of a regulatory framework that should govern the management of natural resources and be used as a reference base when looking for a compromise between the ecological dimension and the economical and social functions of these resources that will permit to lay the foundation for a national plan of ecological development.

• To take into account the constraints of ecological development to the exploitation of natural resources. This involves the integration of the environmental dimension in development programs and, if needed, to submit some of these programs to impact study.

• To work, as far as possible, with a view to conciliate between the objectives of the public policy and the populations interests in order to urge them to adhere to this policy and to act for bringing it to work.

• To take into consideration the master plan of natural reserves initiated by the Ministry in charge of forests in all the plans and the programs of space management, and to set the judicial rules that organize the exploitation of natural reserves for tourist purposes.

• To integrate the educative factor, with its dimensions of instruction, sensitization, supervision and communication, within a strategy of natural resource protection and fighting against pollution, with the purpose to promote environmental education and to develop the responsibility and citizenship spirit when considering the relationship of populations to water resources, soil and forest land. The bringing into work of this program will start in school institutions where the ecological clubs will be animated and where teaching of some matters will be opened on durable development concerns.

4.4.3.2.3. The protection of forest heritage

After having underlined:

• The role of forests in the biological systems conservation and their influence on the sustainability of development.

• The ecological diversity of Moroccan forests and what different vegetation types and various fauna may offer as opportunities for economical, social, cultural and ecological functions.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 73 of 88

• The economical role of the forest sector, with an undeniable proportion in the national economy, sustains agricultural production and preserves biodiversity, water and soils.

• The lack of forest protection involved through the functions of forest is related to the fact that forest surfaces are not yet totally delimited, to the weakness of forest legislation, its obsolescence and because of its exposition to different aggression and misuse forms.

The national charter recommends the bringing into operation the national strategy of management and development of forest patrimony. It is based on an integrated approach that aims the upholding of a balance between forest resources conservation and the necessity of their exploitation to the benefit of development.

To meet these objectives, the strategic choices to be adopted in this field are:

- To achieve the conditions of an integrated conservation of forest heritage

This action aims to protect the forests against all types of despoiling and to initiate new rules of using forest resources warranting their durability and this would be done through the following measures:

• The achievement of the delimitation operation of forests that are part of the public domain and communal forests comprising esparto grass surface areas.

• The updating of the laws related to forest protection and inspection with emphasize on the enjoyment rights and the regulation related to the firewood harvesting and the setting of effective mechanisms of monitoring the execution of the operations of forest patrimony exploitation.

• The reconsideration of the role of local collectivities and the responsibilities to be assumed for forest durable development, especially their participation to the maintenance work of forests and their supervision.

• The elaboration of an adequate judicial platform with the purpose to urge the private investments in forest sector, warranting by that, even the conditions of simplification of the procedures, the maximum of transparency in the transactions and the rigor of inspecting with regard to the execution of operations.

- To consider the forest like a strategic stake at the country scale

This may be done through:

• The mobilization of means necessary to bring into operation the National Forest Program (PFN) and the Master Plan of Reforestation (PDR) with the promotion of parallel policies in fields having an impact on durable D7.1-1.1-0001

Page 74 of 88

development of forest patrimony, especially the policies of energy, of pastoral land development and of water resources conservation.

• The transformation of biodiversity zones and the ecological sites, which are threatened of disappearing, to natural reserves with alternative income solutions as benefit for those who were used to get advantage from them.

• The integration of the population, inhabiting the interior or at the nearby area of forests, in the integrated strategy of forest development by substituting non forest income sources to the anarchic exploitation of forests and by urging the populations to adhere to the conservation of this patrimony.

• The attribution of a permanent and effective protection to the forests in the nearby of cities, through their endowment by a status of natural reserve, the limitation of construction programs within the green spaces and the creation of green belts around cities.

• The diversification of production and the improvement of its quality, the encouragement of partnership and contract systems, the development of forest innovative and competitive enterprise, the promotion of transformation industries that are susceptible to improve local resources manufacturing and to increase its economical value.

- To integrate the research-teaching as a vital component in the forest policy

The aim of this action is to deepen the knowledge about the national forest patrimony and to develop and preserve it. This strategy will equally contribute to reinforce the sudden awareness of the populations about the importance of the forest richness considered as a national patrimony and an undeniable economical lever.

4.4.3.3. The master figures of territory management

In application of recommendations of the national charter, master figures of territory management are being elaborated. The first established one is concerned with developing and management strategies of the Middle-Atlas forest land. This is also inscribed within the framework of preparing a mountainous policy in Morocco. For this purpose, the study site is closely adapted to areas with evident mountainous character (broken relief, altitude, climate…), without considering the regional or even, sometimes, the provincial division.

Considering the protection of the environment and forests, the master regional figure of territory management has retained the following measures:

- Reduction of animal grazing in forests

The animal load and the residence time of animals in forests should progressively be reduced by about the third, in order to facilitate the

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 75 of 88

reconstitution of renewable forage resources and to keep it at a compatible level.

- Reduction of firewood deduction from forests

To get back to the level of durable exploitation, these deductions should be reduced, at least by the half.

These two measures have very hard consequences on the resident populations and could not be applied unless they are foregoing by measures aiming to create jobs and non-agricultural incomes for users, indeed, as is foreseen by the law, through direct financial compensations in case of prohibition.

- To reinforce fighting against firewood deductions and unlawful forest clearings

These actions are intended against deductions of timber wood by the people from the outside of forest area and that act, sometimes, using criminal ways. These hard actions don’t inflict any injury to local populations; quite the contrary. Fighting against this pillage of national resources is absolutely necessary to give credibility to the state policy of preservation and protection facing inhabitants and users.

These measures would help to restore the timber and forage production capacity of forests and then to create a balance between renewable resources and deductions. This requires taking into account the lawful benefits of forest users and their association to local programs in purpose to develop secondary products and to insert fair measures to recompense the furnished effort in order to preserve the national capital that represents a forest in good condition.

5. MAIN FINDINGS1) The cross-sectoral approach represents an opportunity to do an in

depth study of the structural causes affecting wildland fires as well as the possibilities for interventions upon them.

- The consideration of a cross-sectoral approach of those policies that have an influence on the territory provides the opportunity to address the long term social, legal and economic factors that affect the way land in which land is managed; these policies do not pertain to forest policies and point at the structural causes of wildfire events.

- It is necessary to identify and analyse those external policy measures in the forest sector that have a potential influence in wildland fire prevention and propagation. The policies identified as having greater incidence in wildland fire management are: spatial planning, agricultural and rural development policies, energy policy and environmental policy.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 76 of 88

- It is necessary to assess the level of coincidence between public policies objectives regarding wildland fires, that is, to what extent there are complementary or conflictive aims among these. Likewise, it is important to consider the potential negative impacts: spatial planning guidelines which may set the conditions for more devastating fires.

2) The need for a multilevel approach: main guidelines stemming from the EU, the national and sometimes regional regulatory frameworks and the implementation at the regional and local level.

- Most Europeanized policies (e.g. environmental, rural development and energy policies) have only a marginally effect upon fire-related issues. However they do formulate guiding principles with regard to risk management which have strong influence in the development of national policies.

- In centralized countries, the national context is the level in which interventions have to be articulated in accordance with the existing regulatory framework; it is also the level where coordination problems and conflicts have to be tackled. In decentralized countries, the regional level might be the context to look at.

- Finally, the regional/local management level is the adequate scale to assess the links between public policies with their final addressees and with the real possibilities for intervention upon the socio-economic context where they are developed.

3) Territorial policies should play an important role in solving the wildfire problem; they are also to be analyzed when dealing extraordinary difficulty to achieve an effective performance.

- Wildfire risk reduction objectives should be considered as a guiding principle for all public policies with intervention upon the territory, these entails assessing the positive and negative impacts of policy measures, to be extended from the EU to the local management level.

- Forest and civil protection policies acknowledge the influence that territorial policies have upon wildland fire management, especially in prevention and propagation stages (potential to influence structural causes affecting wildfires). Among the interviewed countries, most countries consider rural development and environmental policies as those having a real influence for risk management, while the role of spatial planning seems to be more controversial.

- The relationship between sectoral policies (forest and civil protection) and territorial policies does not take place in similar conditions. The predominance of forest and civil protection interventions upon wildland fire management entails the adoption of a subsidiary role for territorial policies: they do not formulate their own and differentiated

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 77 of 88

principles for wildfire management; they have problems to adopt integrated and agreed approaches; they are unable to multiply positive effects through adequate policy coordination.

- In practice, possibilities for intervention upon structural causes affecting wildfires are limited. There is an important gap between objectives and the measures finally implemented.

4) The need for a comprehensive spatial approach (vs generic approaches) for public policies that affect wildland fires is clear in order to achieve a more effective intervention:

- The relevance that the local level has for the success/failure of given policies, implies the need for an adequate adaptation of the generic principles to the real possibilities for intervention. Hence, it is necessary to do an in depth study about the characteristics and problems of the territory through appropriate planning schemes that move away from global approaches and forward the search for local solutions adapted to the local context. However, progress towards the adequate adaptation of policy measures to territorial specificities as well as greater connectivity with local circumstances and possibilities for intervention is still to come.

- Spatial Planning has the potential to adequately coordinate all needed interventions in order to achieve a more sensible use of the territory. This policy, alongside urban policies, has the potential to effectively affect one of the most important causes increasing wildfire risk: scattered settlements in forest areas (regulations setting restrictions to constructions in high risk or sensible areas, appropriate criteria for settlements and infrastructures, etc.)

- The evolution of the Common Agricultural Policy towards a real rural development policy brings about important opportunities for intervention upon willand fire management such as: the linking of wildfire prevention objectives with local development processes (giving fuel management practices a real sustainable value for the development of rural communities); the recognition of agriculture’s territorial role in wildfire prevention; and the opportunity to take advantage of the new energetic priorities to increase the use of forest biomass.

- The growing perception of wildland fires as on of the main environmental problems for Europe, especially in the Mediterranean area, favours its consideration as a priority for environmental management in protected areas.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 78 of 88

6. REFERENCES

Alcanda, P. (2006) : « Spain: A decentralized model fifteen years of experience in Regional Forest Plans ». In Ministerio de Medio Ambiente (2004): Forest Planning in Spain, Publicaciones del Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Madrid, 216 p.

Ayala Carcedo, F.J. (2000): « La Ordenación del territorio en la prevención de catástrofes naturales y tecnológicas. Bases para un procedimiento técnico administrativo de evaluación de riesgos para la población ». In: Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, Nº 30: 37-49 p.

Badia A; Sauri D; Cerdan R; and Llurdes J-C. (2002): « Causality and management of forest fires in Mediterranean environments: an example from Catalonia ». In: Global environmental change, Part B: Environmental Hazards, Vol.4 Issue.1; 23-32 p.

Benabent Fernández de Córdoba, M. (2006): La Ordenación del territorio en España. Sevilla, Universidad De Sevilla. Servicio De Publicaciones; 638 p.

Burby, R.J. (ed.) (1998): Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use Planning for Sustainable Communities, Washington, Joseph Henry Press, 356 p.Colletti, L. (2005): « Forest fires and the European Union: focussing on prevention ». In EU Conference “Forest fires in Southern Europe – From prevention to restoration” Brussels, 24-25 January 2005.

Davoudi S. (2004) : « Experiencias de planificación del desarrollo territorial en Europa: Gran Bretaña ». In: Romero, J. & Farinós, J. (eds). Ordenación del territorio y desarrollo territorial. El gobierno del territorio en Europa: tradiciones, contextos, culturas y nuevas visions; 173-190 p.

DG JRC. (2005): Forest Fires in Europe 2005. Report nº6; 53 p.

Dubé, Y, Schmithüsen, F, Eds., (2003): Cross-Sectoral Policy Impacts Between Forestry and Other Sectors. Forestry Paper No 142; FAO, Rome, Italy

Elands, B; O’Leary, T.N.; Boerwinkel, H.W.; Freerk Wiersum, K. (2004): « Forest as a mirror of rural conditions; local views on the role of forests across Europe ». In: Forest Policy and Economics, Vol.6 Issue 5,; 469-482 p.

Elands, B., Wiersum, K. F. (2001): « Forestry and rural development in Europe: an exploration of socio-political discourses ». Forest Policy and Economics,Vol.3, Issue 1-2, 5-16 p.

ESDP (1999): ESDP – European Spatial development Perspective. Towards a balanced and sustainable development of the Union territory. Adopted in May 1999 at the Potsdam Informal Council of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning. Available at: http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/g24401.htm (visited 16.08.2006)

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 79 of 88

European Commission (1997): The EU compendium of spatial planning systems and policies. office for official ublications of the european communities, Luxembourg, 192p.

FAO (1999): Report of meeting on public policies affecting forest fires, 14th session, Rome, Italy, 1-5 March 1999, I. Preamble 3.

Fleischhauer, M.; Greiving, S.; Waczura, S. (2007): “Planificación territorial para la gestión de riesgos en Europa”, Boletín de la AGE, 45: 49-78.

Folch, R. (2003): « La aproximación sostenibilista. Evolución de la mirada y del proyecto sobre el territorio ». In Folch, R. (Coord.): El territorio como sistema. Conceptos y métodos de ordenación. Barcelona, Diputació de Barcelona; 91-99 p.

Harris, N.; Hooper, A. (2004): “Rediscovering the ‘Spatial’ in Public Policy and Planning: An Examination of the Spatial Content of Sectoral Policy Documents”, Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 5 (2): 147-169.

Galiana Martín, L. (2004): « La incorporación de los sistemas y planes forestales a los documentos de ordenación del territorio », In: Domínguez, G; Plana, E.; Pecurul, M. , De Miguel, S. (eds.) Boscos i societat.. Actes del V Forum Internacional de Política Forestal. Solsona 16-18 de juliol de 2003), Solsona, Centre Teconológic Forestal de Catalunya,; 28-43 p.

Gómez, R. (coord.) (2004) : Incendios forestales. Causas, situación actual y propuestas, Madrid, WWF – ADENA; 26 p.

Harris, Hooper (2004): “Rediscovering the ‘Spatial’ in Public Policy and Planning: An Examination of the Spatial Content of Sectoral Policy Documents”,

Marull, J and Mallarach, J.M. (2002) : La conectividad ecológica en el Área Metropolitana de Barcelona. In: Ecosistemas, XI (2).

Montiel, C. and Galiana, L. (2005) : « Forest policy and land planning policy in Spain: a regional approach ». In: Forest Policy and Economics, vol. 7/2;131-142 p.

Nadin, V. and Stead, D. (2008): “European Spatial Planning Systems, Social Models and Learning”, disP, 172/1: 35-47.

OECD, (2003): Report on innovation and effectiveness in territorial development policy. 6th Session of the Working Party on territorial indicators. Switzerland, 23-24 June 2003, page 2.

Plana, E.; Carlomagno, E.; De Miguel, S. (2005): « Fire risk management, forest policy and territorial planning: comparative assessment and proposals for an integrated model ». II International Conference on Prevention Strategies for fire is Southern Europe, Barcelona, 9-11 May 2005.

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 80 of 88

Schmidt-Thomé, Ph. (2006): Integration of natural hazards, risk and climate change into spatial planning practices. Academic dissertation to be presented with the permission of the Faculty of Science of the University of Helsinki, for public criticism in the Auditorium D 101 of Physicum, Kumpula, on December 11th, 2006, at 12:00 o’clock

Schmithüsen, F., Bisang, K. & Zimmermann, W. (2001): Cross-sectoral linkages in forestry – review of available information and considerations on further research. Working Paper, Policy and Institutions Branch, Policy and Planning Division, Forestry Department, FAO, Rome.

Schmithüsen, F. (2003): « Understanding cross-sectoral policy impacts – policy and legal aspects ». In FAO: Cross-sectoral policy impacts between forestry and other sectors, Chapter 1.

Scott, M. (2006): “Strategic Spatial Planning and Contested Ruralities: Insights from the Republic of Ireland”, European Planning Studies, vol. 14, nº 6, 811-829.

Smith, K. (2004): Environmental hazards. Assessing risk and reducing disaster (Fourth edition), Routledge, 306 p.

Slee, B., Wiersum, K. F. (2001): « New opportunities for forest-related rural development in industrialized countries». In: Forest Policy and Economics, Vol.3, Issue 1-2; 1-4 p.

Stupak, I. et al. (2007): “Sustainable utilisation of forest biomass for energy—Possibilities and problems: Policy, legislation, certification, and recommendations and guidelines in the Nordic, Baltic, and other European countries, Biomass and Bioenergy, 31: 666-684.Vélez, R. (2000): « Las quemas incontroladas como causa de incendios forestales ». In: Vega Hidalgo, J. A. & Vélez Muñoz, R (Coord.): Actas de la Reunión sobre quemas prescritas, Cuadernos de la Sociedad Española de Ciencias Forestales, nº9-2000; 13-27p.

Xanthoupoulos G; Caballero, D.; Galante M.; Alexandrian D.; Rigolot, E. & Marzano R. (2006): « Forest Fuels Management in Europe ». In: Andrews, P. L. & Butler, Bret W.: Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference Proceedings (Portland, 28-30 March 2006), USDA Forest Service; 807 p.

Zdanowicz , A.; Baldock, D.; Gay,S.H.; Osterberg, B. (2005): Recent evolution of the EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP): state of play and environmental potential, En: MEACAP Project www.ieep.eu/projectMiniSites/meacap/index.php

D7.1-1.1-0001Page 81 of 88

7. ANNEXES Annexe I: Fire Paradox Questionnaire: Territorial Policy sheet

Which of the following

policies have real effects on wildland fire

management?

(IF YES) Please indicate the impact level of this policy over the following wildland fire aspects:Consider: 0 none / 1 medium / 2 strong / 3 very strong

Please specify, if possible, types of measures within the policy that ilustrate this impact

Department in charge of the measure (Please specify contact: Name, email, telephone, address)

  0 1 2 3

Spatial Planning Policy(Landscape management policy included)

YES  

PREVENTION           Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:EXTINCTION         Address

NO                

Rural Development Policy/ Common Agricultural Policy

YES  

PREVENTION        

 

Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:EXTINCTION         Address

NO                

Civil Defence Policy YES  

PREVENTION        

 

Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:EXTINCTION         Address

NO                

Energy Policy (alternative energy sources, biomass)

YES  

PREVENTION        

 

Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:          Address

NO                

Environmental Policy (Nature conservation policy included)

YES  

PREVENTION        

 

Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:EXTINCTION         Address

NO                

Other Policies:(i.e. Tourism/ Recreational Policies)

 

PREVENTION        

 

Name:DETECTION         Email:PROPAGATION         Phone number:EXTINCTION         Address

D7.1-1.1-0001 Page 82 of 88

Which position is taken up by this policy regarding the use of fire in:Are there linkages between this policy with the forest policy, e.g on cross-cutting issues or interagency/inter-sectoral collaboration? If yes, please specify in which way and any reference to documents about this collaboration if they exist

Spatial Planning Policy(Landscape management policy included)

Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered YES    

Extinction: SUPPRESSION FIRE

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered   NO    

                     

Rural Development Policy/ Common Agricultural Policy

Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered YES    

Extinction: SUPPRESSION FIRE

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered   NO    

                     

Civil Defence Policy Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour

  Unfavourable   Not considered

YES    

D7.1-1.1-0001 Page 83 of 88

Extinction: SUPPRESSION FIRE

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered   NO    

                   

Energy Policy (alternative energy sources, biomass)

Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered YES    

Extinction: SUPPRESSION FIRE

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered   NO    

                     

Environmental Policy (Nature conservation policy included)

Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered YES    

Extinction: SUPPRESSION FIRE

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered   NO    

                     

D7.1-1.1-0001 Page 84 of 88

Other Policies:(i.e. Tourism/ Recreational Policies)

Prevention: PRESCRIBED BURNING

In Favour   Unfavourable   Not

considered YES    

D7.1-1.1-0001 Page 85 of 88

Annexe II: List of experts that have replied the Fire Paradox Questionnaire21

- AUSTRIA :o Mr. Franz HUMER*, Magistrat der Stadt Wels Städtische Betriebe-

Feuerwehr-Verwaltung.- BULGARIA:

o Mr Vladimir KONSTANTINOV*, National Forestry Board.- CYPRUS:

o Mr. Kostas A. PAPAGEORGIOU*, Department of Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment.

- FRANCE:o Mr. Philippe MICHAUT, Ministère de l’Intérieur.o Mr. Jean-Michel GILBERT, Ministère de l'agriculture et de la pêche.

- GREECE:o Mr. Panagiotis Balatsos*, Directorate General for Development

Protection of Forests and Natural Environment, Ministry of Rural Development and Food.

o Mrs. Irini Nikolaou, Directorate of Forest Resources Development, Ministry of Rural Development and Food.

- ITALY:o Mrs. Lorenza Colleti*, Division 5 International Forests Affairs Office,

Italian Forest Corps.o Mr. Alfredo Milazzo, Director Division 3 Forest Fires and Civil

Protection, Italian Forest Corps.o Mr. Vincenzo Crimi, Corpo Forestale, Regione de Sicilia.o Mr. Giuseppe Delogu, General Director Corpo forestale e di Vigilanza

Ambientale, Regione della Sardegna.- LATVIA:

o Mr. Agris SUMANIS*, State Forest Service.- LITHUANIA:

o Mr. Zbignev GLAZKO*, Lithuanian Forest Department, Ministry of Environment.

- MOROCCO:

21 Members of the Forest Fire Prevention Expert Group (WGFFP) will be pointed by *

D7.1-1-18-1000Page 86 of 88

o Dr. Abdelsadek SESBOU, Ecole Nationale Forestière d'Ingénieurs.- POLAND:

o Dr. Barbara UBYSZ, Forest Fire Protection Department, Forest Research Institute.

o Mr. Joseph PIWNICKI*, Forest Research Institute. - PORTUGAL:

o Mr. Miguel CRUZ*, General Directorate of Forestry, Forest Fire Defence Department.

o Mr. Paulo RAINHA MATEUS, General Directorate of Forestry, Forest Services.

- SLOVENIA:o Mr. Milan Dubravac, Administration of Civil Protection and Disaster

Relief of Slovenia.- SWEDEN:

o Mr. Leif SANDAHL*, Swedish Rescue Services Agency.- SPAIN:

o Dr. Ricardo VÉLEZ*, Ministry of Environment.o Mr. Cristo PEREZ, Autonomous Administration of Andalucia.o Mrs. Monica BARDAJÍ, Autonomous Administration of Aragón.o Mrs. Marta ALVAREZ, Autonomous Administration of Aragón.o Mr. Jaime MARTIN, Autonomous Administration of Asturias.o Mr, Luis BERBIELA, Autonomous Administration of Baleares.o Mrs, Catalina PUIG, Autonomous Administration of Baleares.o Mr. Julio HERRERO, Autonomous Administration of Islas Canarias.o Mr. Fernando CLAVIJO, Autonomous Administration of Islas Canarias.o Mr. Rafael GOMEZ, Autonomous Administration of Cantabria.o Mrs. Belinda GUERRA, Autonomous Administration of Castilla y

León.o Mr. David HUERTAS, Autonomous Administration of Castilla-La

Mancha.o Mr. Jorge SUAREZ, Autonomous Administration of Comunidad

Valenciana.o Mr. Joaquín FRESNEDA, Autonomous Administration of Extremadura.o Mrs. Julia ROBLES, Autonomous Administration of Extremadura.

D7.1-1-18-1000Page 87 of 88

o Mr. Jose Lorenzo MENDIETA, Autonomous Administration of La Rioja.o Mr. Miguel Angel BELTRAN, Autonomous Administration of Madrid.o Mr. Fermin OLABE, Autonomous Administration of Navarra.o Mr. Mikel REPARAZ, Autonomous Administration of Navarra.o Mr. Jose Manuel MURRIETA, Autonomous Administration of País

Vasco.o Mr. Valentín MUGARZA, Autonomous Administration of País Vasco.

- TUNISIA:o Dr. Abdelmoula KAIS, Institut National du Génie Rural, Eaux et

Forêts.

D7.1-1-18-1000Page 88 of 88