The 8th European Congress of Conservation Biology (ECCB) in Leiden, the Netherlands, focused on this key question, bringing together researchers, policy-makers and conservation practitioners to strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration and dialogue in these challenging times for society. Our institute was represented at the conference with two innovative presentations.
Anna-Lena Vollheyde achieved a particular milestone in this regard: in the week following the successful defence of her doctoral thesis, which was awarded the distinction of summa cum laude, she presented her research to the international specialist audience at the conference. Under the title ‘Levers for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services in pulse systems. An analysis from plot to policy level in the Mediterranean’, she presented parts of her work as a poster presentation. Her research focuses on edible pulses, a topic that has received little attention to date. Her clear message: ‘Pulses can support arable flora if policy rewards the evidence’. Drawing on vegetation science and agronomic data, as well as policy analyses in Italy, Spain and Croatia, she demonstrates that organic farming and structurally rich agricultural landscapes promote the diversity of arable flora and do not necessarily result in reduced yields. At the same time, she makes it clear that the European Common Agricultural Policy has so far taken insufficient account of such scientifically proven levers. Promoting legume cultivation alone is therefore not enough; targeted, evidence-based support measures are necessary.
Prof. Fritz Kleinschroth provided further important insights during a session on the global consequences of habitat loss. In his presentation, ‘Key lessons from 50 years of Germany’s impact mitigation regulation for biodiversity offsetting’, he analysed the development and current challenges facing Germany’s 50-year-old impact mitigation regulation. In light of political pressure to speed up infrastructure projects and to water down the requirement for physical land compensation by replacing it with financial compensation, he spoke out strongly against weakening this important instrument. Instead of deregulation, he called for reforms: through standardised digital biotope mapping, the use of modern technologies such as drones, remote sensing and AI for condition assessments, and transparent, national GIS cadastres, the impact mitigation regulation can be modernised to ensure that the loss of biodiversity in a landscape context continues to be effectively and legally securely offset in the future.
