TAKE AWAY FROM COMPARING THE CASES AND CONCLUSIONS

Under the principles of knowledge sharing and mutual learning, throughout the processes, the teams from the five countries and case studies met and exchanged their findings, challenges, lessons learned. Similarities and differences between the individual case studies emerged. This final section collects some general findings from this process, looking at all the work presented in this technical report at a glance. Bringing together results from the five analysis, THE RES-ES MATRIX presents a snapshot of trade-offs between RES and ES analysed in this work. The RES-ES Matrix considers the Renewable Energy sources analysed, RES, as columns, and the Ecosystem Services, ES, as rows, placing each region into the cell matching the specific combinations of RES/ES used in the region’s case study. Overall, strengths from the results relate to: i) quantification of suitable land for RES(s) (Italy and Romania); ii) Combination of multiple ES in one map, highlighting multi-functionality of landscapes (all the five cases); iii) technical information that match needs and language of the policy- making (Estonia, Germany, and Italy); Comparison of impacts by different types of RES (UK, Germany, Italy, and Romania); very fine resolution of maps (Estonia); specific target on the local scale (UK); and alignment with supra-local objectives of nature conservation, which can thus be more easily incorporated into decision-making at the local level (Germany).