Contribution of the Natura 2000 Network to Biodiversity Conservation in Italy LUIGI MAIORANO, ∗ †‡ ALESSANDRA FALCUCCI, ∗ † EDWARD O. GARTON,† AND LUIGI BOITANI ∗ ∗ Department of Animal and Human Biology, Sapienza Universit` a di Roma, viale dell’Universit` a 32, 00185 Rome, Italy †Department of Fish and Wildlife, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, U.S.A. Abstract: The Natura 2000 network is the most important conservation effort being implemented in Europe. Nevertheless, no comprehensive and systematic region—or nationwide evaluation of the effectiveness of the network has been conducted. We used habitat suitability models and extent of occurrence of 468 species of vertebrates to evaluate the contribution of the Natura 2000 network to biodiversity conservation in Italy. We also estimated the population size of 101 species inside the Natura 2000 network to assess its capacity to maintain or improve the population status of listed species. In general the Italian Natura 2000 did not seem to integrate existing protected areas well. The Natura 2000 network increased from 11% to 20% the area devoted to conservation in Italy and the coverage provided to areas with high biodiversity. Nevertheless, some areas with high numbers of species were devoid of conservation areas, and more than 50% of the highly irreplaceable areas were not considered in the system. Moreover, the Natura 2000 network cannot maintain 44–80% (depending on the taxa considered) of the species in a “favorable conservation status” under World Conservation Union Red List criteria. The Natura 2000 network is probably stronger than the results of our analyses suggest. The system is based on a site-specific expert-based strategy and is driven by direct and detailed knowledge of local diversity. Nevertheless, if Natura 2000 is taken to represent the final point of all the EU conservation policies, it will inevitably fail. Its role in conservation could be enhanced by integrating the Natura 2000 system into a more general strategy that considers natural processes and the ecological and evolutionary mechanisms underlying these processes. Keywords: gap analysis, irreplaceability, IUCN Red List, Natura 2000, protected areas Contribuci´ on de la Red Natura 2000 a la Conservaci´ on de la Biodiversidad en Italia Resumen: La red Natura 2000 es el esfuerzo de conservaci´ on m´ as importante en Europa. Sin embargo, no se ha llevado a cabo una evaluaci´ on regional o nacional exhaustiva y sistem´ atica de la efectvidad de la red. Utilizamos modelos de h´ abitats adecuados y la extensi´ on de la ocurrencia de 468 especies de vertebrados para evaluar la contribuci´ on de la red Natura 2000 a la conservaci´ on de la biodiversidad en Italia. Tambi´ en estimamos el tama˜ no poblacional de 101 especies dentro de la red Natura 2000 para evaluar su capacidad para mantener o mejorar el estatus de la poblaci´ on de especie enlistadas. En general, pareci´ o que la Natura 2000 italiana no integr´ o eficientemente las ´ areas protegidas existentes. La red Natura 2000 increment´ o de 11% a 20% en el ´ area dedicada a la conservaci´ on en Italia y en la cobertura proporcionada a ´ areas con biodiversidad alta. Sin embargo, algunas ´ areas con altos n´ umeros de especies carec´ ıan de ´ areas de conservaci´ on, y m´ as de 50% de las ´ areas irreemplazables no estaban consideradas por el sistema. M´ as aun, la red Natura 2000 no puede mantener entre 44% y 80% (dependiendo de los taxa considerados) de las especies en un “estatus de conservaci´ on favorable” bajo criterios de la Lista Roja de la Uni´ on Mundial de Conservaci´ on. La red Natura 2000 probablemente es m´ as fuerte que lo sugerido por nuestros resultados. El sistema se basa en una estrategia basada en expertos espec´ ıfica para cada sitio y se fundamenta en el conocimiento detallado y directo de la diversidad local. Sin embargo, Natura 2000 fallar´ a inevitablemente si es considerada representante del punto ‡email luigi.maiorano@uniroma1.it Paper submitted May 10, 2007; revised manuscript accepted July 13, 2007. 1433 Conservation Biology Volume 21, No. 6, 1433–1444 C 2007 Society for Conservation Biology DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00831.x