Management of Uricani Natural Areas

1. General information

Location and description of the intervention

City or FUA

Iaşi (FUA)

Region

Europe

Native title of the NBS intervention

Management reservatie naturale padurea Uricani

Short description of the intervention

This initiative focused on creating a management plan for the Uricani forest, a protected area located near Iasi. Designated as both a nature reserve and a Natura 2000 site, the forest is crucial for its "Dacia oak & hornbeam forests" habitat and the presence of the stag beetle, the largest beetle in Romania and Europe.
Despite existing nature protection designations, the environmental NGO "Asociația Ecoturistică Prietenii Pădurii Bălțătești" recognized the need for an updated management plan. With European funding, the NGO developed a model plan for protected areas in Neamt and Iasi counties, including Uricani forest.
The NGO conducted monitoring activities in cooperation with forestry directorates to assess habitat conditions and stag beetle populations. The goal was to identify risks and requirements for species conservation and design appropriate management actions. Additionally, the organization aimed to promote the area's tourism potential and conduct awareness-raising activities with local communities and schools.
The completed management plan, developed through public consultation and approved by the Romanian environmental ministry, included measures for natural habitat regeneration, ensuring suitable conditions for the stag beetle, addressing illegal logging, pasturing, and waste disposal, and establishing information points and educational activities for the community. (1-7)

Website of the intervention

https://www.mmediu.ro/articol/mmap-supune-dezbaterii-publice-planul-de-manageme…

Principal problems

Environmental Degradation

Invasive alien species

Deforestation and forest degradation

Health, Well-being and Social cohesion

Poor community engagement

Resource Scarcity and Competition

Over-exploitation of natural resources (water resources, overgrazing, fisheries, mangroves, fore products)

Other

Please specify other principal problem

Waste disposal (4, p. 33).

Implementation area characterization

Climate

Continental (Cold-summer humid continental, Cold-winter dry continental, Cold-summer dry continental)

Ecosystem

Temperate forests

Address

Padurea Uricani
707316 Uricani
Romania

Location

The NBS is situated in an area, with clear delineation of boundaries and a specific shape (polygon). The NBS project can also have more than one area location (more than one polygon, situated close by).

Area boundary (map-based)

NBS area image

Source of NBS area image

European Environment Agency: https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/sites/ROSCI0181

Total area

1066900.00m²

NBS area

1066900.00m²

Area description

Rangeland

Type of area before implementation of the NBS

Protected Area

Timeline of intervention

Start date of the intervention (planning process)

2012

Start date of intervention (implementation process)

2016

End date of the intervention

2021

Present stage of the intervention

Completed

2. Objectives of the intervention

Objectives of the intervention

Goals of the intervention

To describe and evaluate the current state of biodiversity in the area, along with its environmental and socioeconomic conditions. (2, p.4)
To define the outcome indicators for management actions necessary to conserve and regulate activities in the area.(2, p.4)
To plan spatial and periodical measures to ensure the conservation of the stag beetle and oak and hornbeam forests (including clearance of invasive species), considering traditional and current local community activities.(2, p.4)
To manage anthropocentric activities in the area, such as waste disposal or grazing, through regulations and sanctions.(2, p. 50)
To raise awareness and inform the local population about the natural area, facilitating access to resources and increasing the area's tourist appeal. (2, p. 50, 51)
To include relevant stakeholders in the design of the management plan and involve the local community . (4,5)

Key Priorities

Biodiversity (conservation and/or restoration)

Social Justice and community

Sustainability challenge(s) addressed

Environmental quality

Waste management

Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)

Habitat and biodiversity restoration

Habitat and biodiversity conservation

Inclusive and effective governance (SDG 16)

Inclusive governance

Social justice, cohesion and equity (SDG 10)

Environmental education

Sense of community and community engagement

Economic development and employment (SDG 8)

Tourism support

Habitats and biodiversity conservation: What types of conservation goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?

Species-focused

Ecosystem-focused

Habitats and biodiversity conservation: What activities are implemented to realize the conservation goals and targets?

Protect and enhance urban habitats

Preserve and strengthen existing habitats and ecosystems

Reduce negative impacts and avoid the alteration/damage of ecosystem

Protect species

Undertake specific measures to protect species

Undertake specific measures to protect native species

Undertake specific measures to protect endangered species

Control and clean invasive alien species

Means for conservation governance

Raise public awareness

Create and use scientific knowledge for conservation

What types of restoration goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?

Ecosystem-focused

What activities are implemented to realize the restoration goals and targets?

Rehabilitate and restore damaged or destroyed ecosystems

Clear and control invasive alien species

Implementation activities and NBS focus

Implementation activities

For the plan:
1. A database was developed about the forest habitat, the stag beetle, and the environmental and socioeconomic context in which they exist (5). This took into account the limits of the protected area, existing forms of land ownership and management and land use regimes (5).
2. An education unit was involved to educate and disseminate information on general notions related to nature protection and the protected area (5). The participants were also able to learn about specialised equipment for field study and use it (5).
3. Public consultations were carried out with relevant stakeholders (representatives of forestry directorates, the local communities, the environmental protection agencies and forest rangers, land owners) to include their suggestions in the plan (5). Once developed, the plan was released for public consultations (5).
The plan was then adopted by the Iasi forestry directorate, which:
4. Prepared a budget and informed labour needs for the management actions (2, p. 93).
5. Designed regeneration, conservation, and management activities to protect the oak forest and ensure habitat for the beetle (2, p. 78). These included management of illegal logging and pasture, and waste disposal and clearing invasive species (2, p. 78).
6. Creation of public information points and educational activities for the surrounding communities (2, p. 82).
7. Previews biodiversity monitoring and ecotourism related activities (2, p. 85 to 88).

Type of NBS project

Ecological restoration of ecosystems

Restoration and protection of ecosystems (including water ecosystems)

Protection of natural ecosystems

Habitat restoration

Habitat conservation

Knowledge creation and awareness raising

Educational and awareness raising programs

Improved governance of green or blue areas

Establishment of inclusive governance mechanisms involving local communities

Monitoring and maintenance of habitats and/or biodiversity

Clearing out invasive alien species and allow natural regeneration maintaining the functionality the ecosystem

Habitat mapping, restoration and monitoring-focused management

Species-specific monitoring and conservation programs

3. NBS domains, ES and scale

NBS domain and interventions

Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented

Parks and urban forests

Large urban parks or forests

Amenities offered by the NBS

Unknown

Design elements for well-being

Visual elements (e.g., expansive views, scenic views, natural light, diverse vegetation)

Services

Expected ecosystem services delivered

Habitat and supporting services

Habitats for species

Cultural services

Tourism

Aesthetic appreciation

Intellectual interactions (scientific and / or educational)

Physical and experiential interactions with plants and animals

Scale

Spatial scale

Micro-scale: District/neighbourhood level

Beneficiaries

Demographics in implementation area

The village of Uricani is located in the Miroslava commune, which had 11.958 inhabitants in 2015 (4, p. 29). 92% of the population is of romainan origin (4, p. 29). The population group between 0-30 years of old represents the 40% of the population whereas the population older than 60 years old represents the 16% (4, p. 29). Referring more specifically to Uricani, "The majority of inhabitants are self-employed, especially in agriculture, where productivity and average incomes continue to remain low in relation to the specificities: soil, relief, climate, biodiversity and other specificities. The population of small farmers in the village of Uricani is heavily dependent on the facilities offered by the largest urban center of Moldova, the municipality of Iasi, which is located in the immediate vicinity" (4, p. 30).

Socio-economic profile of the area

Low-income

Communities vulnerable to environmental hazards or climate change impacts

Yes

Specification of climate or environmentally vulnerable communities

Low-income neighborhoods

Rural agricultural communities

Non-government actors

Non-governmental organisation (NGO) / Civil society / Churches

Primary Beneficiaries

Local government/Municipality

Non-government organisation/Civil Society

Citizens or community groups

Young people and children

Specify primary beneficiaries

Non-government organisation/Civil Society: "The beneficiaries of the project used the experiences gained in other projects with external funding, carried out within the scope of the Neamț Forestry Directorate" (6).
Local government/Municipality: "can contribute to the sustainable development of the area by increasing its attractiveness, from a tourist point of view" (7).
Citizens or community groups: "can contribute to the sustainable development of the area by increasing its attractiveness, from a tourist point of view" (7).
Young people and children: "10 educational units were involved (secondary schools and technological high schools) from the communes where the respective protected natural areas are located" (5).

Marginalized groups

Children, young people or youth groups

Measures for inclusion of marginalised groups

As stated above: "10 educational units were involved (secondary schools and technological high schools) from the communes where the respective protected natural areas are located" (5).

Other beneficiaries

Local wildlife (e.g., birds, pollinators)

Native plant vegetation

Endangered species (flora and fauna)

Natural habitats (e.g. wetland, forests, coastal areas)

4. Governance and financing

Governance

Governance arrangements

Led by non-government actors

Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative

The initiative was led by the environmental NGO "Asociația Ecoturistică Prietenii Pădurii Bălțătești" that applied for and got granted EU funds for Regional Development to create plans for several natural areas included the Uricani forest (5 to 7). They developed the specific model for Uricani in collaboration with the forest directorate of Iasi (5 & 6). In their design they included consultations for suggestions from representatives of a diverse range of interest groups (representatives of forestry directorates, the local communities, the environmental protection agencies and forest rangers, land owners) before and after (5 to 7). They included educational units to raise awareness and educate on the protected area (5 & 6). The management plan was adopted by the national environmental ministry and implemented through the corresponding directorates (2 to 4). The plan also previews constant monitoring by the directorates or individuals and activities for tourism (2, p. 85 to 88).

Key actors - initiating organization

Non-government organisation/civil society

Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)

National government

Regional government

Local government/municipality

Public sector institution

Citizens or community group

EU body

Stages of citizen and community engagement

Planning and design (e.g. site selection, identification of key priorities)

Development of project proposal

Level of citizen and community engagement

Moderate

Community empowerment or capacity-building initiatives

Implementation of educational programs, workshops or trainings

Creation of collaborative decision-making processes that actively involve community members

Establishment of mentorship programs or partnerships with local institutions (e.g. schools, kinder gardens, hospitals, nursing homes)

Participatory methods/forms of stakeholder involvement (all stakeholders)

Co-planning (e.g. stakeholder workshops, focus groups, participatory mapping)

Taskforce groups

Dissemination of information and education

Consultation (e.g. workshop, surveys, community meetings, town halls)

Co-management/Joint management

Uncommon actors ("Missing actors")

Public Services

Schools

Land owners

Public space owned by the city

Policy drivers

NBS intervention implemented in response to a Regional Directive/Strategy

Yes

Please specify the "Regional Directive/Strategy"

Natura 2000 standards (5 & 6).

NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan

Yes

Please specify the national regulations/strategy/plan

Legea nr. 49/2011 of privind regimul ariilor naturale protejate, conservarea habitatelor naturale, a florei şi faunei sălbatice // Legea nr. 5/2000 aprobarea Planului de amenajare a teritoriului naţional // Ordinul ministrului mediului şi dezvoltării durabile nr. 1964/2007 // Ordinul ministrului mediului și schimbărilor climatice nr. 1052/2014 (4, p. 4 & 5).

If there is a relevant strategy or plan, please specify the theme/type of the plan

National Biodiversity Strategy or Action Plan

NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan

Unknown

Mandatory or voluntary intervention

Mandatory (based on policy)

Intervention is mandatory

Environmental regulation

Enablers & Barriers

Type of enablers

NGOs/Community groups driving the implementation

Support from transitional governance actors

Funds, subsidies or investment for GI/NBS in the city (available for the city or provided by the city)

Please provide details (e.g, name of the plan or strategy) for the selected policies or initiatives.

Model de management privind ariile naturale protejate atribuite în custodie în judeţele Neamţ şi Iaşi (5) // Fondul European de Dezvoltare Regională în cadrul Programului Operaţional Sectorial Mediu, Axa prioritară 4, Sectorul Protecţia Naturii (5) (EU funds).

Governace and decison-making instruments

Legislative and regulatory instruments (e.g. laws, strategies, regulations or restrictions)

Standards, certifications or guidelines (e.g. standards for accessible green space; biodiversity standards)

Economic and fiscal instruments (e.g. subsidies or grants, charges or fees, payments for ecosystem services (PES))

Educational and knowledge sharing instruments (e.g. science/ living labs, awareness raising campaigns, specific educational programs, green hubs)

Arrangements for governance cooperation

Task forces or commissions (e.g. group of multi-disciplinary experts)

Information-sharing platforms or networks (e.g. websites for sharing best practices, data or resources pertinent to the project)

Performance monitoring and evaluation frameworks (e.g. adoption of KPIs, or establishment or monitoring and evaluation processes)

Barriers

Unknown.

Financing

Total cost

€50,000 - €100,000

Please specify total cost (EUR)

62692,58 (2, p. 93).

What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?

62692,58 (2, p. 93).

Source(s) of funding

Public regional budget

EU funds

Type of fund(s) used

Earmarked public budget

Direct funding (grants, subsidies, or self-financed projects by private entities)

Non-financial contribution

Yes

Who provided the non-financial contribution?

Citizens (e.g. volunteering)

Type of non-financial contribution

Provision of expertise

Co-finance for NBS

Yes

Co-governance arrangement

An NGO

Entrepreneurship opportunities

Unknown

Business models

Risk reduction model

Green densification model

Which of the involved actors was motivated by this model?

Private non-for-profit actor (e.g. NGO, foundation)

5. Evaluation and learning

Impacts, benefits

Environmental impacts

Environmental quality

Improved waste management

Expected improved waste management

Green space and habitat

Increased conservation or restoration of ecosystems

Achieved increased conservation or restoration of ecosystems

Reduced biodiversity loss

Expected reduced biodiversity loss

Increased protection of threatened species

Expected increased protection of threatened species

Improved prevention or control of invasive alien species

Expected improved prevention or control of invasive alien species

Description of environmental benefits

-Expected improved waste management: "Prohibition and control garbage storage in protected natural areas" (4, p. 86).
-Achieved increased conservation or restoration of ecosystems: "Realization of necessary forestry works - helping the regeneration of natural oak species control invasive and others" (4, p. 86). "
-Expected increased protection of threatened species: "Ensuring habitat conditions (of the stag beetle); Maintaining deadwood within the site" (4, p. 86.
-Expected improved prevention or control of invasive alien species: ""Realization of necessary forestry works - helping the regeneration of natural oak species control invasive and others" (4, p. 86). "
-Expected reduced biodiversity loss: "In the Uricani Forest, the protection and conservation of an invertebrate species is being pursued present in Annex II of Council Directive 92/43/EEC, Lucanus cervus, code 1083 and habitat of community importance 91I0* Eurosiberian forest-steppe vegetation with Quercus spp. For these species and habitats, mapping was carried out with the help of modern techniques and in especially with the help of geographic information systems, GIS and positioning global systems. "

Environmental impact indicators

Total number of vascular plant species protected or introduced

Total area of protected or secured natural areas (in ha)

106,69

Economic impacts

Increase of green jobs (e.g. paid employment positions)

Expected increase of green jobs (e.g. paid employment positions)

More sustainable tourism

Expected more sustainable tourism

Description of economic benefits

-Expected increase of green jobs (e.g. paid employment positions): "At the custodian level, there is a person responsible for the protected area in its custody. In the field, security and control are permanently ensured by field staff" (4, p. 77).
-Expected more sustainable tourism: "can contribute to the sustainable development of the area by increasing its attractiveness for tourism" (7).

Economic impact indicators

Number of jobs created (e.g. park maintenance, landscaping, ecotourism)

Social and cultural impact indicators

Surface area of accessible green spaces (in ha)

106,69

Number of community events, gatherings, or volunteer activities organized in green spaces

Number of environmental education programs, workshops, outreach activities (eg. in schools, community centers, public spaces)

Evidence for use of assessment

Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process

Yes

Actors involved in the assessment, monitoring or evaluation of NBS impacts

Public sector institution

Non-government organisation/civil society

Presence of indicators used in reporting

Yes

Type of indicators

Input indicators

Process indicators

Outcome indicators

Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports

Yes

Link to monitoring/evaluation reports

https://www.mmediu.ro/app/webroot/uploads/files/2015-11-05_PM_Padurea_Uricani.p…

Availability of a web-based monitoring tool

No evidence in public records

Name of any specific impact assessment tools

Unknown.

Use of GIS in mapping impacts

Yes

Link to GIS monitoring data

https://www.mmediu.ro/app/webroot/uploads/files/2015-11-05_PM_Padurea_Uricani.p…

Cost-benefit analysis

Transparency

Meetings with stakeholders’ representatives

Inclusion of diverse stakeholders in project governance processes (e.g. planning, implementation, monitoring, etc.)

Clear communication channels for stakeholders to provide feedback, raise concerns, and ask questions about the project

Public disclosure of project funding sources and/or budgets

Online disclosure of technical reports (e.g. project documents, reports, or data)

Justice

Community satisfaction

Unknown

Description of locals satisfaction with the project

Unknown.

Trade-offs & Negative impacts

Unknown

Please specify Trade-offs & Negative impacts Selected

Unknown.

Measures to prevent gentrification or displacement

No initiatives or policies were implemented

High-quality & Transformative NBS

Multiple impacts delivery (climate, biodiversity, just community)

Goal setting and impacts delivery

No, project goals were not set, and benefits were not delivered in all 3 key areas.

Reaching original project goals

Most of the project goals were achieved

Please specify the achievements of the project goals

Biodiversity Goals:
-Expected improved waste management: "Prohibition and control garbage storage in protected natural areas" (4, p. 86).
-Achieved increased conservation or restoration of ecosystems: "Realization of necessary forestry works - helping the regeneration of natural oak species control invasive and others" (4, p. 86). "
-Expected increased protection of threatened species: "Ensuring habitat conditions (of the stag beetle); Maintaining deadwood within the site" (4, p. 86.
-Expected improved prevention or control of invasive alien species: ""Realization of necessary forestry works - helping the regeneration of natural oak species control invasive and others" (4, p. 86). "
-Expected reduced biodiversity loss: "In the Uricani Forest, the protection and conservation of an invertebrate species is being pursued present in Annex II of Council Directive 92/43/EEC, Lucanus cervus, code 1083 and habitat of community importance 91I0* Eurosiberian forest-steppe vegetation with Quercus spp. For these species and habitats, mapping was carried out with the help of modern techniques and in especially with the help of geographic information systems, GIS and positioning global systems. "
Social justice and community:
-Achieved increased involvement of locals in the management of green spaces: "In the information/consultation actions of the interested parties organized one for each protected area, the interested parties for each protected area participated, the representatives of the Forestry Directorates (Neamţ, Iaşi) within the radius of which the respective area is located, the representatives of the local communities (where the case may be, including landowners)..." (5).
-Expected improvement in people’s connection to nature: "In the applications, students were presented with general notions about natural capital, ecosystems, key species and indicator species, the threats to which protected areas are subject, but also information specific to each protected natural area" (6).
-Expected increased appreciation for natural spaces: "In the applications, students were presented with general notions about natural capital, ecosystems, key species and indicator species, the threats to which protected areas are subject, but also information specific to each protected natural area" (5).
-Achieved increased support for education and scientific research: "In this sense, for each objective of conservation interest, species or habitat, conservation status monitoring protocols have been developed" (2, p. 66).
-Expected increased knowledge of locals about local nature: "Realization of actions of informing the population of the area with the occasion of events related to environmental protection" (2, p. 82).

Long-term perspective

Yes

Cost-effective solutions

Equitable impacts

A. All stakeholders benefit fairly from the project

Transformative capacity

Ecological change (e.g. ecosystem functions and their distribution)

Magnitude of change

Incremental: shallow; that is, mostly maintaining business-as-usual approaches to adaptation

Application of lessons learned

Unknown

Perception of Environmental Change

Unknown

6. Sources

References

Europea Environment Agency (n.d.). EUNIS -Site factsheet for Pădurea Uricani. Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Ministerul Mediului, Apelor si Padurilor (2015 ). PLANUL DE MANAGEMENT AL SITULUI DE IMPORTANȚĂ COMUNITARĂ ROSCI0181 PĂDUREA URICANI ȘI AL REZERVAȚIEI NATURALE 2.538 PĂDUREA URICANI. Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Miniterul Mediului, Apelor si Padurilor (2015). MMAP supune dezbaterii publice Planul de management și regulamentul sitului de importanță comunitară ROSCI0181 Pădurea Uricani și al rezervației naturale 2.538 Pădurea Uricani . Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Directia Silvica Iasi (n.d.). Padurea Uricani. Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Asociaţia Ecoturistică Prietenii Pădurii Bălţăteşti (2015). Model de management privind ariile naturale protejate atribuite în custodie în judeţele Neamţ şi Iaşi . Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Trăsnea, A. (2015). Un ONG din judetul Neamț a finalizat elaborarea planurilor de management pentru 9 arii protejate cu specific forestier din județele Neamț și Iași ©. Ziar Targu Neamt , Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Asociația Ecoturistică Prietenii Pădurii Bălțăteşti (2013). Pliant_uricani. Accessed on September 19, 2024, [Source link] [Archive];

Comments and notes

Comments

GIS was used in the monitoring reports but the data is not available.

Public Images

Informative bulletin on protected area

http://www.bxm.ro/iasi/index.php/galerii-foto?AG_MK=0&AG_form_paginInitPages_0=1&AG_form_albumInitFolders_0=Galerii_foto/Uricani&AG_MK=0

Flower field in the middle of the forest

http://www.bxm.ro/iasi/index.php/galerii-foto?AG_MK=0&AG_form_paginInitPages_0=1&AG_form_albumInitFolders_0=Galerii_foto/Uricani&AG_MK=0

Protected beetle next to measurements in the field

http://www.bxm.ro/iasi/index.php/galerii-foto?AG_MK=0&AG_form_paginInitPages_0=1&AG_form_albumInitFolders_0=Galerii_foto/Uricani&AG_MK=0