Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:43:10.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 4 - Nature Conservation Policy, Legislation and Funding in the EU

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2023

By
Graham Tucker ,
Kaley Hart ,
Andrew Farmer ,
Euan Dunn  and
David Baldock
Edited by
Graham Tucker
Graham Tucker
Affiliation:
Nature Conservation Consulting
Get access

Summary

The chapter briefly describes the evolution of EU environmental policy, before primarily focusing on the Birds Directive and Habitats Directive (i.e. the Nature Directives), in particular their objectives and key measures for habitats and species. These comprise two key pillars of measures: 1) general species protection; 2) the creation of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas as well as their protection from developments (through appropriate assessments) and the establishment of their necessary conservation measures. The main sources of funding for the Nature Directive and broader nature conservation are identified. Other supporting EU environmental policies and legislation are outlined, including in relation to environmental impact assessments, strategic environmental assessments, the Environmental Liability Directive, the Water Framework Directive, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and other maritime policy instruments, air pollution, the Invasive Alien Species Regulation, and the Common Agricultural Policy. A summary is provided of the EU Biodiversity Strategies of 1998, and for 2010, 2020 (with a list of the targets and related actions) and 2030.

Keywords

Biodiversitynature conservationenvironmental policyenvironmental legislationEuropean UnionBirds DirectiveHabitats DirectiveNatura 2000protected areasBiodiversity Strategy
Type
Chapter
Information
Nature Conservation in Europe
Approaches and Lessons
 , pp. 59 - 105
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alliance Environnement (2007) Evaluation of the environmental impacts of CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) measures related to the beef and veal sector and the milk sector. Brussels: Alliance Environnement. Report to DG Agriculture, European Commission.Google Scholar
Alliance Environnement (2009) Evaluation of the environmental impact of milk quotas. Brussels: Alliance Environnement. Report to DG Agriculture, European Commission.Google Scholar
Alliance Environnement (2017) Evaluation study of the forestry measures under Rural Development. Brussels: Alliance Environnement. Report to DG Agriculture, European Commission.Google Scholar
Alliance Environnement (2019) Evaluation of the impact of the CAP on habitats, landscapes, biodiversity. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Alliance Environnement Report to DG Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission.Google Scholar
Alliance Environnement & Thünen-Institut (2017) Evaluation study of the payment for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment. Brussels: Alliance Environnement. Report to DG Agriculture, European Commission.Google Scholar
Anonymous (2021) Common Fisheries Policy: Mission Not Yet Accomplished. BirdLife International, ClientEarth, The Fisheries Secretariat, Oceana, Our Fish, Seas at Risk, and WWF. https://europe.oceana.org/sites/default/files/20210615_cfp_mission_not_yet_accomplished_joint_ngo_paper.pdfGoogle Scholar
Arcadis & IEEP (2010) Dealing with conflicts in the implementation and management of the Natura 2000 network – strategic planning (lot 2). Guidance document. Antwerp, Belgium: Arcadis. Report to the European Commission.Google Scholar
Batáry, P., Dicks, L. V., Kleijn, D. & Sutherland, W. J. (2015) The role of agri-environment schemes in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 29 (4), 1006–1016.Google Scholar
Bennett, G. & Mulongoy, K. J. (2006) Review of experience with ecological networks, corridors and buffer zones. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. CBD Technical Series No 23.Google Scholar
Bicknell, A. W. J., Oro, D., Camphuysen, C. J. & Votier, S. C. (2013) Potential consequences of discard reform for seabird communities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 50 (3), 649–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bijlsma, R. J., Agrillo, E., Attorre, F. et al. (2019) Defining and applying the concept of Favourable Reference Values for species and habitats under the EU Birds and Habitats Directive. Wageningen, the Netherlands: Wageningen Environmental Research.Google Scholar
BirdLife International (2004) Birds in the European Union: A Status Assessment. Wageningen, Netherlands: Birdlife International.Google Scholar
Born, C.-H., Cliquet, A., Schoukens, H., Misonne, D. & Van Hoorick, G. (eds.) (2015) The Habitats Directive in Its EU Environmental Law Context – European Nature’s Best Hope? London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brady, M. (2010) Impact of CAP reform on the environment: some regional results. Paper to the OECD Workshop on the Disaggregated Impacts of CAP Reform, 10–11 March 2010. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Bromley, P. (1997) Nature Conservation in Europe. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Carboneras, C., Genovesi, P., Vilà, M. et al. (2018) A prioritised list of invasive alien species to assist the effective implementation of EU legislation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55, 539–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, G. (2018) Landing the Blame: Overfishing in the Atlantic 2018. London: New Economics Foundation.Google Scholar
Carpenter, S. R. B., Walker, B. H., Anderies, J. M. & Abel, N. (2001) From metaphor to measurement: resilience of what to what? Ecosystems, 4, 765–781.Google Scholar
Catchpole, R., Smithers, R., Baarda, P. & Eycott, A. (eds.) (2009) Ecological networks: science and practice. Proceedings of the 16th Annual IALE (UK) Conference. Edinburgh University, 1–3 September 2009. International Association for Landscape Ecology, UK Region.Google Scholar
Clutten, R. & Tafur, I. (2012) Are imperative reasons imperiling the Habitats Directive? An assessment of Article 6(4) and the IROPI exception. In The Habitats Directive – A Developer’s Obstacle Course?, ed. Jones, G., pp. 167–182. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Committee of the Regions (2010) Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on improving the EIA and SEA Directives. European Union Committee of the Regions 8th plenary session 14 and 15 April 2010.Google Scholar
Council of Europe (1996) Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Nature and Environment, No. 74.Google Scholar
Donald, P. F., Sanderson, F. J., Burfield, I. J., Bierman, S. M., Gregory, R. D. & Waliczky, Z. (2007) International conservation policy delivers benefits for birds in Europe. Science, 317 (5839), 810–813.Google Scholar
ECA (2011) Is agri-environment support well designed and managed? Luxembourg: European Court of Auditors. Special Report No 7/2011.Google Scholar
ECA (2014) Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020? Luxembourg: European Court of Auditors. Special Report No 12/2014.Google Scholar
EEA (2007) Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010: proposal for a first set of indicators to monitor progress in Europe. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.Google Scholar
EEA (2010) EU 2010 Biodiversity Baseline. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. EEA Technical Report No 12/2010.Google Scholar
EEA (2012) Streamlining European biodiversity indicators 2020: Building a future on lessons learnt from the SEBI 2010 process. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. Technical Report No 11/2012.Google Scholar
EEA (2015) State of nature in the EU: results from reporting under the nature directives 2007-2012. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. Technical Report No 2/2015.Google Scholar
ETC/BD (1997) Criteria for assessing national lists of pSCI at biogeographical level. Paris: European Topic Centre on Biodiversity. https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-bd/activities/hab_97_2_criter_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
ETC/BD (2011) Assessment, monitoring and reporting under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive: Explanatory Notes & Guidelines for the period 2007–2012. Paris: European Topic Centre on Biodiversity.Google Scholar
European Commission (1993) Second report on the application of Directive No 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. COM(93) 572.Google Scholar
European Commission (1998a) Communication on a Forestry Strategy for the European Union. COM(1998) 649.Google Scholar
European Commission (1998b) Communication on a European Biodiversity Strategy. COM(1998) 42 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2001) Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites. Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
European Commission (2004) Financing Natura 2000. COM(2004)431.Google Scholar
European Commission (2006a) Nature and Biodiversity cases. Rulings of the European Court of Justice. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
European Commission (2006b) Halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010 – and beyond – Sustaining ecosystem services for human well-being. COM(2006) 0216 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007a) Guidance document on Article 6(4) of the ‘Habitats Directive’ 92/43/EEC: Clarification of the concepts of: alternative solutions, imperative reasons of overriding public interest, compensatory measures, overall coherence, opinion of the Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007b) Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 20000 sites. Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007c) An evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe. COM(2007) 308 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2008) Guide to sustainable hunting under the Birds Directive. Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2009) On the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive (Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directives 97/11/EC and 2003/35/EC). COM(2009) 378 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2011a) Financing Natura 2000 – Investing in Natura 2000: delivering benefits for nature and people. SEC(2011)1573 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2011b) Links between the Water Framework Directive and Nature Directives: frequently asked questions. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2011c) Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. COM(2011) 244 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2012a) Commission note on setting conservation objectives for Natura 2000 sites, Brussels: European Commission. Final version 23/11/2012.Google Scholar
European Commission (2012b) Links between the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD 2008/56/EC) and the Nature Directives (Birds Directive 2009/147/EEC (BD) and Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (HD)). Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2012c) Action Plan for reducing incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gears. COM(2012) 665 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013a) Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats – EUR28. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013b) Commission note on establishing conservation measures for Natura 2000 sites. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013c) Sustainable hunting and Natura 2000. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013d) Guidelines on climate change and Natura 2000. Dealing with the impact of climate change on the management of the Natura 2000 network of areas of high biodiversity value. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2014a) Managing Natura 2000 sites – The provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive 92/43/EEC. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2014b) Key concepts of Article 7(4) of Directive 79/409/EEC period of reproduction and prenuptial migration of Annex II bird species in the 28 EU Member States. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2016) Fitness Check of the EU Nature Legislation (Birds and Habitats Directives). SWD(2016) 472 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2017a) An Action Plan for nature, people and the economy. COM(2017) 198 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2017b) Factsheets providing details of actions in the Action Plan for nature, people and the economy. SWD(2017) 139 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2018) Managing Natura 2000 sites: the provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive 92/43/EEC. C(2018) 7621 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2019a) The European Green Deal. COM(2019) 640 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2019b) EVALUATION of the Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. SWD(2019) 413 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2020a) EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 – Bringing back nature into our lives. COM(2020) 380 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2020b) A Farm to Fork Strategy – for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system. COM(2020) 381 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2020c) A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. COM (2020) 98 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021a) ‘Fit for 55’: delivering the EU’s 2030 Climate Target on the way to climate neutrality. COM(2021) 550 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021b) Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive. COM(2021) 7301 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021c) Commission notice – Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites – Methodological guidance on Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. C(2021) 6913 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021d) New EU Forest Strategy for 2030. COM(2021) 572 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021e) Guidelines providing a common understanding of the term ‘environmental damage’ as defined in Article 2 of Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage. Commission Notice C/2021/1860.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021f) Towards more sustainable fishing in the EU: state of play and orientations for 2022. COM(2021) 279 final.Google Scholar
European Commission (2021g) Implementation of the Technical Measures Regulation (Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1241). COM(2021) 583 final.Google Scholar
Evans, D. (2012) Building the European Union’s Natura 2000 network. Nature Conservation, 1, 11–26.Google Scholar
Farmer, A. (ed.) (2012) Manual of European Environmental Policy. 2nd ed. London: Taylor and Francis. Available online at https://ieep.eu/understanding-the-eu/manual-of-european-environmental-policy/Google Scholar
Fernández, S. A. (2003) Spanish coordination in the European Union: the case of the habitats directive. Administration & Society, 34, 678–699.Google Scholar
Fisher, I., Ashpole, J., Scallan, D., Proud, T. & Carboneras, C. (compilers) (2018) International Single Species Action Plan for the conservation of the European Turtle-dove Streptopelia turtur (2018 to 2028). Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. (2013) Treaty options: towards a behavioral understanding of treaty design. Virginia Journal of International Law, 53 (2), 309–363.Google Scholar
Gantioler, S., Rayment, M., Bassi, S. et al. (2010) Costs and Socio-Economic Benefits associated with the Natura 2000 Network. Brussels: Institute for European Environmental Policy/GHK/Ecologic. Report to the European Commission.Google Scholar
Grimmett, R. F. A. & Jones, T. A. (1989) Important Bird Areas in Europe. Cambridge, UK: International Council for Bird Preservation.Google Scholar
Haigh, N. (2016) EU Environmental Policy; Its Journey to Centre Stage. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hart, K., Rayment, M. & Lee, H. (2010) Paper 1: Achieving a Transition Away from CAP Direct Payments. London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Paper prepared by IEEP for the Land Use Policy Group.Google Scholar
Heath, M. F. & Evans, M. I. (eds.) (2000) Important Bird Areas in Europe: Priority Sites for Conservation. Updated (2011) ed. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International.Google Scholar
Hovardas, T. & Marsden, K. (2018) Good practice in large carnivore conservation and management: Insights from the EU Platform on Coexistence between People and Large Carnivores. In Large Carnivore Conservation and Management, ed. Hovardas, T., pp. 314–337. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICES (2017) Report of the OSPAR/HELCOM/ICES Working Group on Marine Birds (JWGBIRD), 10–14 October 2016, Thetford, UK. ICES CM 2016/ACOM:29.Google Scholar
IEEP (2008) The environmental benefits of set-aside in the EU, a summary of evidence. London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report for the UK Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.Google Scholar
IEEP (2016) The potential policy and environmental consequences for the UK of a departure from the European Union. London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report in collaboration with The Wildlife Trusts, RSPB and WWF.Google Scholar
Jackson, A. L. R. (2018) Conserving Europe’s Wildlife: Law and Policy of the Natura 2000 Network of Protected Areas. 1st ed. Earthscan/Routledge.Google Scholar
Jongman, R. H. G. & Pungetti, G. (eds.) (2004) Ecological Networks and Greenways. Concept, Design, Implementation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keenleyside, C., Beaufoy, G., Tucker, G. & Jones, G. (2014) High Nature Value farming throughout EU-27 and Its financial support under the CAP. London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report for DG Environment.Google Scholar
Kettunen, M., Baldock, D., Gantioler, S. et al. (2011) Assessment of the Natura 2000 co-financing arrangements of the EU financing instrument. Brussels: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report for the European Commission.Google Scholar
Kettunen, M., Illes, A., Rayment, M. et al. (2017) Integration approach to financing of biodiversity: evaluation of results and analysis of options for the future. Brussels/London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report for the European Commission.Google Scholar
Kettunen, M., Terry, A., Tucker, G. M. & Jones, A. (2007) Guidance on the maintenance of landscape connectivity features of major importance for wild flora and fauna. Guidance on the implementation of Article 3 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC) and Article 10 of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC). Brussels/London: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report to the European Commission.Google Scholar
Krämer, L. (2009) The European Commission’s Opinions under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive. Journal of Environmental Law, 21 (1), 59–85.Google Scholar
Maes, J., Teller, A., Erhard, M. et al. (2020) Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services: An EU Ecosystem Assessment. Ispra, Italy: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
Maynou, F., del Mar Gill, M, Vitale, S. et al. (2018) Fishers’ perception of the European Union discards ban: perspective from south European fisheries. Marine Policy, 89, 147–153.Google Scholar
McConville, A. J. & Tucker, G. M. (2015) Review of Favourable Conservation Status and Birds Directive Article 2 interpretation within the European Union. Peterborough, UK: Natural England. Natural England commissioned Report 176.Google Scholar
Medarova-Bergstrom, K., Kettunen, M., Illes, A., Baldock, D., Rayment, M. & Hart, K. (2015) Tracking biodiversity expenditure in the EU Budget: Part I – Guidance on definition and criteria for biodiversity expenditure in the EU budget. London/Brussels: Institute for European Environmental Policy. Report for the European Commission.Google Scholar
Milieu & IUCN (2014) Experience gained in the application of ELD biodiversity damage. Brussels: Milieu. Final report for the European Commission, DG Environment.Google Scholar
Milieu, IEEP & ICF (2016) Evaluation study to support the fitness check of the Birds and Habitats Directives. Brussels: Milieu Ltd, Institute for European Environmental Policy and the ICF International. Report for the European Commission.Google Scholar
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Morris, R. K. A., Alonso, I., Jefferson, R. G. & Kirby, K. J. (2006) The creation of compensatory habitat – can it secure sustainable development? Journal for Nature Conservation, 14, 106–116.Google Scholar
Moss, D. & Wyatt, B. K. (1994) The CORINE biotopes project: a database for conservation of nature and wildlife in the European community. Applied Geography, 14 (4), 327–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, D. E. (2007) Towards coherence in site networks. In Waterbirds Around the World, eds. Boere, G. C., Galbraith, C. A., & Stroud, D. A., pp. 673–674. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Sanderson, F. J., Pople, R. G., Ieronymidou, C. et al. (2015) Assessing the performance of EU nature legislation in protecting target bird species in an era of climate change. Conservation Letters, 9 (3), 172–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scalera, R., Rabitsch, W. & Underwood, E. (2020) FAQs on how the Invasive Alien Species Regulation interacts with the EU Nature Directives. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
Schmid, E., Sinabell, F. & Hofreither, M. F. (2010) Phasing out of environmentally harmful subsidies: consequences of the 2003 CAP Reform in Austria. Paper to the OECD Workshop on the disaggregated impacts of CAP reform, 10–11 March 2010. Paris, OECD.Google Scholar
Stevens, C. J., Bell, J. N. B., Brimblecombe, P. et al. (2020) The impact of air pollution on terrestrial managed and natural vegetation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 378 (2183).Google Scholar
Stroud, D. A., Pienkowski, M. W. & Mudge, G. P. (1990) Protecting Internationally Important Bird Sites: A Review Of the Network of EC Special Protection Areas in Great Britain. Peterborough, UK: Nature Conservancy Council.Google Scholar
Sundseth, K. & Roth, P. (2013) Study on Evaluating and Improving the Article 6.3 Permit Procedure for Natura 2000 Sites. Brussels: Ecosystems Ltd.Google Scholar
Sundseth, K. & Roth, P. (2014) Article 6 of the Habitats Directive. Rulings of the European Court of Justice. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
TEEB (2011) The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making. London and Washington: Earthscan.Google Scholar
ten Brink, P., Badura, T., Bassi, S. et al. (2011) Estimating the overall economic value of the benefits provided by the Natura 2000 network. Brussels: Institute for European Environmental Policy/GHK/Ecologic. Report to the European Commission.Google Scholar
The Pew Charitable Trusts (2021) Lessons From Implementation of the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy: Mixed record highlights steps still needed to turn the tide towards better management. The Pew Charitable Trusts.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. M. & Heath, M. F. (1994) Birds in Europe: Their Conservation Status. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International.Google Scholar
UNEP-WCMC (2008) National and regional networks of Marine Protected Areas: a review of progress. Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, D. (1992) Maastricht and the environment: the implications for the EC’s environmental policy on the Treaty on European Union. Journal of Environmental Law, 4 (2), 211–239.Google Scholar
WWF-UK (2017) Remote Electronic Monitoring: why camera technology is a cost-effective and robust solution to improving UK fisheries management. Woking, UK: WWF-UK.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×