3. Natural Capital and Biodiversity
Biodiversity Condition, Vulnerability and Management Evidence
Sardinia’s biodiversity value is accompanied by significant conservation responsibility. Island ecosystems often contain species and habitats with restricted distributions, limited capacity to shift geographically and high sensitivity to habitat loss, fragmentation, disturbance and climate change.
The presence of protected areas and Natura 2000 sites is therefore important, but it should not be interpreted as evidence that all species and habitats are secure. Conservation status, ecological condition and management effectiveness must be assessed through monitoring, site-specific evidence and transparent reporting.
Research on Sardinian endemic flora has identified substantial conservation concern. A checklist of Sardinian-exclusive vascular plants found that 33 taxa were included in Italy’s national Red List and 60 in the regional Red List available at the time of publication; nine were considered Critically Endangered, ten Endangered and thirteen Vulnerable. These figures are not a current island-wide threat assessment and should not be used as such. They show, however, why land-use decisions, wildfire prevention, habitat restoration and visitor management require particular care in areas containing narrow-range species.[dialnet.unirioja]
Wetlands provide a further example of the relationship between biodiversity, visitor use and management. They are ecological systems of high value for migratory birds, water regulation, landscape diversity and environmental education. They can also be affected by hydrological modification, pollution, infrastructure development, recreation and climate-related changes in water availability.
A recent peer-reviewed study of wetland activities and impacts in Sardinia found that leisure and tourism contributed significantly to habitat degradation and faunal change in the records assessed, although not to pollution or other expected impacts within that dataset. This does not demonstrate that tourism is the principal threat to all Sardinian wetlands. It does indicate that visitor activity should be included in monitoring and management, alongside water governance, surrounding land use, invasive species, pollution and climate risk.[link.springer]
| Biodiversity-management issue | Evidence-based implication |
|---|---|
| Endemic and restricted-range species | Spatial planning and visitor access should avoid habitat fragmentation and disturbance in ecologically sensitive locations |
| Wetlands and lagoons | Recreation, birdwatching, access routes and interpretation should be planned alongside hydrological and habitat-management objectives |
| Marine habitats | Boating, anchoring, diving, fishing, waste and water quality require site-specific regulation and monitoring |
| Forests and mountain systems | Wildfire prevention, trail design, erosion control and habitat restoration should be linked to outdoor-tourism development |
| Coastal habitats | Beach access, parking, pedestrian routes, dune restoration and visitor information need to operate as one management system |
| Protected areas | Visitor use should be monitored as a pressure variable, not treated only as a benefit or promotional measure |
Evidence from Sardinian marine protected areas illustrates the potential value of ecosystem-based visitor management. In the Isola dell’Asinara Marine Protected Area, a research project developed regulatory proposals integrating Natura 2000 conservation measures, integrated coastal-zone management and ecosystem-service assessment. Monitoring cited in the study estimated approximately 44,450 bathers annually, of whom 76% were occasional tourists.[mdpi]
The case does not establish a universal model for all protected areas in Sardinia. It demonstrates that visitor access, ecological condition and socio-economic considerations can be assessed together rather than through separate tourism and conservation processes.
Similarly, Capo Carbonara Marine Protected Area has undertaken a participatory rezoning process involving MPA managers, scientific experts, the municipality and local stakeholders. The European Commission’s marine case-study documentation describes the process as combining spatial data, ecological priorities, socio-economic considerations and public consultation in the revision of zoning arrangements.[water.europa]
These examples suggest an important principle for Sardinia: biodiversity protection is most effective when it is not treated as a stand-alone environmental function. It should be connected to spatial planning, public access, tourism operations, local business, community participation, education, monitoring and adaptive regulation.
The relevant destination-management question is therefore not whether nature should be opened to tourism or closed to tourism. It is how access, use, restoration and local benefit can be governed according to the condition and vulnerability of each ecosystem.