Papers by Zymantas Morkvenas
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), Nov 30, 2015
Case study Public good Main evaluation challenges addressed Case study context Indicators tested ... more Case study Public good Main evaluation challenges addressed Case study context Indicators tested Methods tested Expected outcome Case study area
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), Dec 31, 2015
offers a Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) to measure the performance of the whol... more offers a Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) to measure the performance of the whole CAP (both Pillar I-direct payments to farmers and market measures, and Pillar II-rural development measures). More specifically for rural development (Pillar II), there is a Common Monitoring and Evaluation System (CMES), which is part of the CMEF and is set out by: the common provisions regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013), which defines the common monitoring and evaluation elements for the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI); and the rural development regulation (Regulation (EU)No 1305/2013), which addresses the specificities for the rural development programmes. CMEF-The compilation of rules and procedures necessary for evaluating the whole CAP CMES-The rules and procedures within the CMEF which relate to rural development (Pillar II of the CAP). Council Regulation (EC) 1305/2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) obliges all EU Member States to establish a system of ex-ante evaluations, annual implementation reports and ex-post evaluations for each rural development programme (RDP) (Art. 75 to Art. 79) (European Commission, 2013). This regulation specifies the objectives of monitoring and evaluation (Art. 68), the required use of indicators, including the establishment of common indicators (Art. 8, 67, 69), data provision and data management (Art. 69, 70, 71, 76, 78). Regulation 1305/2013 also lays down requirements in relation to monitoring and evaluation reporting in the AIR and to the Monitoring Committee (MC) (Art. 74, 75, 76) including provision of information on the implementation of the evaluation plan (Art. 8, 76) (European Evaluation Helpdesk, 2015). Tveit M, Ode Å, Fry G (2006) Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Research 31(3): 229-255. Tyrväinen L, Tahvanainen L (1999) Using computer graphics for assessing the aesthetic value of large-scale rural landscapes.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), Nov 30, 2015
The brochure is produced within the frame of the LIFE+ Environment Policy and Governance project ... more The brochure is produced within the frame of the LIFE+ Environment Policy and Governance project "Integrated planning tool to ensure viability of grasslands" (LIFE Viva Grass, project No. LIFE13 ENV/ LT/000189). The content of this publication and use of information it contains is the sole responsibility of the Baltic Environmental Forum and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.
2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2014
Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological chal... more Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological challenges. However, recent methodological developments have improved the understanding and capacity of analysing the impacts of farming and forestry on the provision of public goods. Against this background, the main aim of ENVIEVAL is to develop and test improved tools for the evaluation of environmental impacts of rural development measures and programmes in EU Member States. The main innovative aspects of the new methodological frameworks are that they enable the integration of micro-and macro-level evaluations (and their results) and provide guidance on the selection and application of costeffective evaluation methods to estimate net effects of rural development programmes on the different main public goods from farming and forestry.
Aquatic Warbler long time was mysterious bird in Lithuania. Despite some data about its breeding ... more Aquatic Warbler long time was mysterious bird in Lithuania. Despite some data about its breeding since the middle of 20th century and following some numbers from different sites over the country, only in 1995 for the first time was evaluated breeding population size - around 400 singing males. Since 2000, regular yearly population estimates (with few exceptions) for the country were calculated. The remaining northernmost breeding population of the species situated in 3 sites: Zuvintas, Nemunasdelta and coastal meadows alongCuronian lagoon. No other new sites of evident breeding during the last 14 years were detected. The number of singing males decreased gradually from 240 in 2000 down to 50 in 2013. The population decreasing in all of the sites. Zuvintas population with solitary birds is at the edge of extinction. Aquatic Warbler in Lithuania occupies habitats from seasonally flooded rich in nutrients Nemunas delta meadows to brackish Curonian lagoon coastal sedge meadows and sedge-dominated fens in Zuvintas. Management regime varies a lot among the sites, from totally abandoned to intensively using for hay making or grazing. Present abandoned and overgrown by reeds and bushes sites were used for hay making before 1990s. The decrease of population can be explained by two main reasons. First of all, abandonment of large formerly managed meadows, especially in Tyrai and Zuvintas, caused very big decrease of suitable habitat area. Secondly, very intensive management in Nemunas delta polder meadows during the last decades caused breeding success nearly to zero level. For short living bird, as Aquatic Warbler is, several years without descendants and with no immigration, leads to population crashVytauto Didžiojo universitetasŽemės ūkio akademij
One Ecosystem, 2020
The area covered by low-input agroecosystems (e.g. semi-natural and permanent grasslands) in Euro... more The area covered by low-input agroecosystems (e.g. semi-natural and permanent grasslands) in Europe has considerably decreased throughout the last century. To support more sustainable management practices and to promote biodiversity and ecosystem service values of such agroecosystems, a decision support tool was developed. The tool aims to enhance the implementation of ecosystem services and address the challenge of their integration into spatial planning. The Viva Grass tool aims to enhance the maintenance of ecosystem services delivered by low-input agroecosystems. It does so by providing spatially-explicit decision support for land-use planning and sustainable management of agroecosystems. The Viva Grass tool is a multi-criteria decision analysis tool for integrated planning. It is designed for farmers, spatial planners and policy-makers to support decisions for management of agroecosystems. The tool has been tested to assess spatial planning in eight case studies across the Balt...
CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Nov 30, 2015
CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Nov 30, 2015
Case study Public good Main evaluation challenges addressed Case study context Indicators tested ... more Case study Public good Main evaluation challenges addressed Case study context Indicators tested Methods tested Expected outcome Case study area
CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Dec 31, 2015
offers a Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) to measure the performance of the whol... more offers a Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) to measure the performance of the whole CAP (both Pillar I-direct payments to farmers and market measures, and Pillar II-rural development measures). More specifically for rural development (Pillar II), there is a Common Monitoring and Evaluation System (CMES), which is part of the CMEF and is set out by: the common provisions regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013), which defines the common monitoring and evaluation elements for the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI); and the rural development regulation (Regulation (EU)No 1305/2013), which addresses the specificities for the rural development programmes. CMEF-The compilation of rules and procedures necessary for evaluating the whole CAP CMES-The rules and procedures within the CMEF which relate to rural development (Pillar II of the CAP). Council Regulation (EC) 1305/2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) obliges all EU Member States to establish a system of ex-ante evaluations, annual implementation reports and ex-post evaluations for each rural development programme (RDP) (Art. 75 to Art. 79) (European Commission, 2013). This regulation specifies the objectives of monitoring and evaluation (Art. 68), the required use of indicators, including the establishment of common indicators (Art. 8, 67, 69), data provision and data management (Art. 69, 70, 71, 76, 78). Regulation 1305/2013 also lays down requirements in relation to monitoring and evaluation reporting in the AIR and to the Monitoring Committee (MC) (Art. 74, 75, 76) including provision of information on the implementation of the evaluation plan (Art. 8, 76) (European Evaluation Helpdesk, 2015). Tveit M, Ode Å, Fry G (2006) Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Research 31(3): 229-255. Tyrväinen L, Tahvanainen L (1999) Using computer graphics for assessing the aesthetic value of large-scale rural landscapes.
Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological chal... more Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological challenges. However, recent methodological developments have improved the understanding and capacity of analysing the impacts of farming and forestry on the provision of public goods. Against this background, the main aim of ENVIEVAL is to develop and test improved tools for the evaluation of environmental impacts of rural development measures and programmes in EU Member States. The main innovative aspects of the new methodological frameworks are that they enable the integration of micro- and macro-level evaluations (and their results) and provide guidance on the selection and application of costeffective evaluation methods to estimate net effects of rural development programmes on the different main public goods from farming and forestry.
Figure 2 from: Valatin G, Abildtrup J, Accastello C, Al-Tawaha A, Andreucci M, Atanasova S, Avdibegović M, Baksic N, Banasik K, Barquin J, Barstad J, Bastakova V, Becirovic D, Begueria S, Bethers U, Bihunova M, Blagojevic B, Bösch M, Bournaris T, Cao Y, Carvalho-Santos C, Chikalanov A, Cunha e Sá...
Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological chal... more Evaluations of environmental impacts of RDPs are characterized by a number of methodological challenges. However, recent methodological developments have improved the understanding and capacity of analysing the impacts of farming and forestry on the provision of public goods. Against this background, the main aim of ENVIEVAL is to develop and test improved tools for the evaluation of environmental impacts of rural development measures and programmes in EU Member States. The main innovative aspects of the new methodological frameworks are that they enable the integration of micro- and macro-level evaluations (and their results) and provide guidance on the selection and application of costeffective evaluation methods to estimate net effects of rural development programmes on the different main public goods from farming and forestry.
Uploads
Papers by Zymantas Morkvenas