Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Ready for the Second Review
EC-LNV, 23 June 2004
Henk Simons - Milieu en Natuur Planbureau (MNP), RIVM
Co-ordinator Responses Working Group
Outline
Context
Description and Status
Conceptual Framework
Structure and Preliminary results of the Global Working Groups
Products
Second round review
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
An international scientific assessment of the consequences of ecosystem changes for human well-being:
Modeled on the IPCC
Providing information requested by: Conventions (CBD, CCD, Ramsar, CMS) other partners including the private sector and civil society
With the goals of: stimulating and guiding action to conserve ecosystems and
enhance their contribution to human well-being building capacity to undertake integrated ecosystem assessments
and to act on their information
Human Challenge
Considerable progress has been made in fighting poverty life expectancy increasing infant mortality decreasing agricultural production increasing, etc.
Major problems remain 1.2 billion people live on less than $1 per day 1 billion people do not have access to clean water More than 2 billion people have no access to sanitation 1.3 billion are breathing air below the standards considered
acceptable by WHO 700 million people suffer from indoor air pollution due to biomass
burning
Source: Serageldin, 2002, Science 296:54
Growing Demand For Ecosystem Services
Water
One-third of the world’s population is now subject to water scarcity.
Population facing water scarcity will double over the next 30 years
Food
Food production must increase to meet the needs of an additional 3 billion people over the next 30 years
Timber
Wood fuel is the only source of fuel for one third of the world’s population.
Wood demand will double in next 50 years.
A social process to bring the findings of science to bear on the needs of decision-makers
Assessment
Monitoring Research
Stakeholders: Governments Private Sector Civil Society
What is a policy-relevant assessment?
A scientific assessment applies the judgement of experts to existing knowledge to provide scientifically credible answers to policy relevant questions.
MA Design Draws On LessonsFrom Earlier Assessments
Political legitimacyPolitical
legitimacy
Scientific credibilityScientific credibility
UtilityUtility
• Authorized by the UN and 4 conventions: CBD, CCD, Ramsar, CMS – to provide a portion of their information/assessment needs
• Multi-stakeholder governance structure: intergovernmental and non-governmental, including the private sector and civil society
• Modeled on IPCC procedures and structure
- Working groups and coordinating/lead authors
- North-South, regional, disciplinary, gender balance
- Independent review board, 2 rounds of expert and government review
- Policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive
• Focus strongly shaped by audiences
- Extensive analysis of user needs
- Review of draft products against user needs
- Focus on joint needs of multiple users
Key success factor from past experiences Relevant MA design features
11
22
33
MA Organisation
Sub-Global AssessmentWorking Group
Sub-Global AssessmentWorking Group ConditionCondition ScenariosScenarios ResponseResponse
Global Assessment Working Groups
MA BoardMA Board
Assessment PanelWorking Group ChairsAssessment PanelWorking Group Chairs
Support FunctionsHighly Distributed Secretariat
Support FunctionsHighly Distributed Secretariat
Outreach & Engagement
Outreach & Engagement
Review Board Chairs
Review Board Chairs
Chapter Review Editors
Chapter Review Editors
Timeline
1st designmeeting
UN Launch
2nd designmeeting
Launch and design
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Beginreview
Review process
Reviewmeetings
Board approval
Release of assessment and synthesis reports;
Outreach
1st working group
meetings
Release of Conceptual Framework report
Core assessment work
2nd working group
meetings
3rd working group
meetings
Combined working group
meeting
Current status: 1st Round Review 1st Report (MA Conceptual Framework) completed 800 Authors, 85 countries Review Board established Chapters made available for review early January; reviewers had ten
weeks to submit review comments Reviews invited from approximately
750 Expert Reviewers 600 National Focal Points
Focal points for the CBD, CCD, Ramsar Convention, CMS, and UNFCCC in ~180 countries
15 “Affiliated Scientific Organizations and National Academies of Sciences (ASOs)
6900 Review comments received from approximately 215 Expert reviewers 35 National Focal Points 4 ASOs
Draft chapters being revised and available in June 2004 for in-depth review
Ecosystem Services The benefits people obtain from ecosystems
RegulatingBenefits obtained from regulation of
ecosystem processes
• climate regulation• disease regulation
• flood regulation
ProvisioningGoods produced or
provided by ecosystems
• food • fresh water• fuel wood
• genetic resources
CulturalNon-material benefits from ecosystems
• spiritual • recreational
• aesthetic• inspirational• educational
SupportingServices necessary for production of other ecosystem services
• Soil formation• Nutrient cycling
• Primary production
SupportingServices
ProvisioningServices
RegulatingServices
CulturalServices
Freedomsand
Choice
Security
Basic Material forGood Life
Health
Good SocialRelations
Ecosystem Services Constituents of Well-being
Consequences of Ecosystem Change for Human Well-being
MA Working Groups
Scenario Working Group Given plausible changes in
primary drivers, what will be the consequences for ecosystems, their services, and human well-being?
Responses Working Group What can we do to enhance well-
being and conserve ecosystems?
Sub-Global Assessment Working GroupAll of the above… at sub-global scales
Condition Working Group What is the current condition and
historical trends of ecosystems and their services?
What have been the consequences of changes in ecosystems for human well-being?
Condition Working Group
Introduction Methods, Drivers of change,
Biodiversity, HWB and Vulnerability
Ecosystem Services Analysed by major clusters of
ecosystem services
Ecosystems Multiple services from various systems.
Synthesis
Technical chapters examine current status and trends of ecosystem services across ecosystem types
A) ProvisioningChapter 8. FreshwaterChapter 9. FoodChapter 10. Timber, Fiber, FuelChapter 11. Novel Products and Industries from Biodiversity
B) Supporting and RegulatingChapter 12. Biodiversity regulation of ecosystem servicesChapter 13. Nutrient cyclingChapter 14. Air quality and climate regulationChapter 15. Human infectious disease agentsChapter 16. Waste processing and detoxificationChapter 17. Natural Hazard regulation
C) CulturalChapter 18. Cultural and amenity services
Then examine the status of different ecosystems in providing these ecosystem services
Ch. 19 Cultivated SystemsCh. 20 Dryland systemsCh. 21 Forest systemsCh. 22 Urban systemsCh. 23 Inland Water systemsCh. 24 Coastal systemsCh. 25 Marine systemsCh. 26 Polar SystemsCh. 27 Mountain systemsCh. 28 Island systems
Example questions being answered by the Condition Working Group:
What have been the consequences of ecosystem degradation for human health?
What have been the economic costs and benefits of changes to ecosystems?
What have been the trends in the supply of services from ecosystems?
How will current trends play out in the near future? How has the capacity of ecosystems to provide services
changed in the recent past What are the trends in the capacities of ecosystems to
continue to provide services.
A selection of DRAFT findings from the Condition Working Group:
Ecosystems and Human well-being
Although on average human well-being has improved in the recent past, human populations are growing faster in ecosystems characterised by low well-being and low productivity, and there is a growing number of people at high risk of adverse ecosystem changes.
The world is experiencing a worsening trend of human suffering and economic losses from natural disasters. The capacity of ecosystems to regulate such natural disasters has diminished.
Flood damage in Europe in 2002 was higher than in any previous year.
The impacts of declining ecosystem services are often shifted from the groups responsible for the decline onto others.
A selection of DRAFT findings from the Condition Working Group:
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
The loss of biodiversity has lead to measurable reductions in aspects of human well-being.
The composition of communities of species, rather than numbers of species is most important in determining the capacity of the system to provide ecosystem services.
The integrity of interactions between species is critical for the preservation of long-term human food production on land and in the sea (e.g. pollination and pathogen control).
Among plants and vertebrates, the great majority of species are declining in distribution, population size, or both. We are not likely to meet the CBD 2010 target.
Overfishing is the dominant factor reducing marine biodiversity. Most terrestrial extinctions are predicted to occur in tropical
forests.
A selection of DRAFT findings from the Condition Working Group:
Ecosystem services
There is a slower rate of growth of water use, although global per capita water availability is falling. Water withdrawal is currently about 10% of global continental runoff.
The growth of world cereal production has slowed recently, and the supply of fish as a cheap source of protein for developing countries has declined. There is an accelerating demand for livestock products.
Global consumption of fuelwood peaked in the 1990s, and is now declining, due to the availability of alternative fuel sources.
Terrestrial ecosystems were a sink for a third of historical CO2 emissions and a fifth of 1990s emissions. The sink was partially due to afforestation/reforestation in Europe and other regions.
A selection of DRAFT findings from the Condition Working Group:
Ecosystems
Societies in coastal systems are increasingly impacted by fisheries failures in coastal and marine systems, exacerbated by pollution and development.
Islands are all coast, and are especially vulnerable
Climate change is having a real impact on polar systems But there is a high coping capacity in Polar countries, and so the
vulnerability of Polar societies is low.
The capacity of wetlands to deliver services is deteriorating around the world, and is worse than any other system type.
In Europe, the negative impacts of urban settlements on ecosystem services and human well-being has become more delayed and dispersed.
Scenarios W.G. 29 Apr 04
What are the consequences for ecosystem services and human well-being of alternative worlds in which different approaches to sustainability are emphasized?
Green technologyTechnoGarden
Local-regional governance, common-property institutions
Adapting Mosaic
Economic growth, public goodsGlobal Orchestration
Reserves, parks, national-level policiesOrder from Strength
Dominant Approach for SustainabilityScenario Name
Scenario Working Group
Storylines
Global Orchestration, Techno-garden, etc.
IMPACTWorld food production
IMAGE 2
Global change
WaterGAPWorld water resources
Model Inputs Demographic Economic Bio-physicalTechnological
AIM
Global change
Model Outputs
Provisioning Services - Food (meat, fish, grain
production)- Fiber (timber)- Freshwater (renewable
water resources & withdrawals)
- Fuel wood (biofuels)
Regulating - Climate regulation (C
flux) - Air quality (NOx, S
emissions)
Supporting primary production
Links to human wellbeing
Approach to quantifying the MA scenarios
Chapters of Scenarios Assessment Report
Summary for Decision Makers (SDM)
Chapter 1: Summary of MA Conceptual Framework Chapter 2: Global scenarios in Historic PerspectiveChapter 3: Why is it important to include Ecology in Global ScenariosChapter 4: State of the Art in Describing Future Changes in EcosystemsChapter 5: Scenarios for Ecosystem Services: Rationale and Overview Chapter 6: Methodology for Developing the MA Scenarios Chapter 7: Drivers of Change in Ecosystem Conditions and Services
Chapter 8: Four ScenariosChapter 9: Changes in Ecosystem Services and their DriversChapter 10: Biodiversity Across ScenariosChapter 11: Human Wellbeing Across ScenariosChapter 12: Synergies and Trade-offs among Ecosystem ServicesChapter 13: Synthesis: Lessons LearnedChapter 14: Synthesis: Policy Implications
The probability is small of any one scenario is the real future
None of the scenarios is “business as usual”, though allscenarios have elements of the world as it exists today.
None of the scenarios is a “best” path or “worst” path. Significantly better or worse outcomes could be developed using different mixes of the policies and practices addressed in the scenarios.
The future will be a mix of approaches and consequencesdescribed in the scenarios, plus events and innovations thathave not been imagined at the time of writing.
The scenarios are a menu of choices and their conse-quences. Readers may use this menu to consider their priorities, preferences and choices.
Scenarios: Answers to Frequently-Asked Questions
Scenarios: Selected Draft Headlines
Demand for provisioning services (food, fiber, water, etc.)increases in all scenarios. This increases stress onthe ecosystems that provide these services.
By 2050, 10% to 20% of current grassland and forestland will be lost, mostly due to expansion of agriculture.
By 2050, water stress increases in arid regions of Africaand Asia. The number of people living in water-stressedareas increases 200% to 300%. Globally, the volume ofpolluted fresh water increases. Water availability declines,mostly due to changes in climate and water withdrawal.
Ecosystems currently sequester CO2, but the future of thisservice is in doubt. The CO2 sink decreases in theOrder from Strength scenario
Diversity (vascular plants) declines in all scenarios(most in Order from Strength, least in TechnoGarden and Adapting Mosaic). Greatest losses in warm mixed forest, savanna, scrub, tropical forest & woodland.
Fish populations are lost due to declining water availability.Differences among scenarios are minor. Most losses offishes occur in poor tropical and subtropical countries.
Our ability to reduce the rate of loss of species’ populations by 2010 is in doubt. Two scenarios (Order from Strength and Global Orchestration) fail to meet the target. The other two may, at best, barely meet the target.
Scenarios: Selected Draft Headlines
Part I: Conceptual Framework for Evaluating Responses Typology of reponses (legal, institutional, economic, technical, ecological) Methodologies to assess responses Uncertainties in the effectiveness of responses
Part II: Assessment of Past and Current Responses Biodiversity Food, fiber, fresh water, fuel Nutrients, waste, climate Cultural services Integrated responses
Part III: Synthesis: Ingredients for successful responses Poverty reduction Health Choosing responses Millennium Development Goals
Responses Working Group
Responses are defined as the whole range of human actions,
including policies, strategies, and interventions to address specific issues, needs, opportunities or
problems
Responses WG: definition
Chapters of Responses Assessment Report
Summary for Decision Makers (SDM)
Chapter 1: Summary of MA Conceptual Framework Chapter 2: Typology of ResponsesChapter 3: Assessing ResponsesChapter 4: Recognizing Uncertainties in Evaluating ResponsesChapter 5: Biodiversity Chapter 6: Food and cultivated systemsChapter 7: WaterChapter 8: Wood, Fuel wood and Non Wood Forest ProductsChapter 9: Nutrient ManagementChapter 10: Waste Management, Processing and DetoxificationChapter 11: Flood and Storm ControlChapter 12: Ecosystems and Vector Borne Disease ControlChapter 13: Responses to Climate ChangeChapter 14: Cultural ServicesChapter 15: Integrated ResponsesChapter 16: Consequences and Options for Human HealthChapter 17: Consequences of Responses for poverty
reduction, Ecosystem services and human wellbeing
Chapter 18: Choosing ResponsesChapter 19 Implications for achieving the MDGs
Some Preliminary Messages
Water: Significant opportunities to avoid future water crises exist in areas of improved design and management of water infrastructure, more inclusive and integrated governance and more efficient resource allocation through market based approaches
Forests: Strategies to improve the impact of forest product use on ecosystem health and human well being are more affected by decisions taken outside the forest sector than those within it.
People and Ecosystems: Policies and Economic Incentives concerning management systems and conservation strategies that separate people from their environment, freezing both cultures and ecosystems have limited success……
Key challenges in the development of effective response strategies arises out of limited knowledge on the complexity and variability of site-specific factors, which determine outcomes and costs
A further insightIntegrated responses (IR) are gaining in importance in both developing and developed countries but they have had mixed results. IR are responses that address degradation of ecosystem services across a number of systems simultaneously, or that also explicitly include objectives to enhance human well-being. IR occur at different scales and across scales, and use a range of instruments for implementation. Increasingly they are associated with the application of multi-stakeholder processes and with decentralization, and they may include actors and institutions from government, civil society and private sector.
Examples include some multi-lateral environmental agreements, environmental policy integration within national governments, and multi-sectoral approaches such as Integrated Coastal Zone Management.
Although many IR make ambitious claims about their likely benefits, in practice the results of implementation have been mixed in terms of ecological, social and economic impacts.
Assessment Outputs: Global2003 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for
Assessment MA Data Catalog
Datasets being used in the MA
2004 Edited volume of conference paper: Bridging Scales and
Epistemologies in Multi-scale Assessments
2005 Technical Assessment Reports (300-800 pages ea.) and
Summaries for Decision-makers (SDMs) Sub-global Assessment Condition/Trends Assessment Scenario Assessment Response Options Assessment Summary Volume (SDMs of 4 reports)
2005 (cont) Synthesis Reports (30-50 page)
Overarching Synthesis Biodiversity (CBD) Desertification (CCD) Wetlands (Ramsar) Private Sector Health and Ecosystems (tentative) Food and Cultivated Systems (tentative)
Board Summary of Key Messages (10 p.) Other Products
Reports available over internet (multiple language for summary docs) Interactive web-based MA indicator exploration capability Partnerships for expanded outreach: radio, theatre, documentaries,
film (tentative) Partnerships for capacity-building/training outreach (tentative)
Assessment Outputs: Global
Major (expected) achievements of MA
Sound baseline information on ecosystems, human well-being and their linkages
New concepts, approaches, methodology Networking among scientists and institutions Support to Integrated Ecosystem
Assessments at various levels (local to regional/global)
Ultimately and most importantly, support to policy development and implementation by various audiences (Conventions, National and local Governments, Private sector)
MA Review Process
Jan 8 Mar 19
First round of Government and Expert Review
June August
Second round of Government and Expert Review
2004 2005
Release of Findings
Comments from 1st review (1)
Important dimensions that need strenthening Link to human wellbeing and poverty reduction Valuation, including non-economic valuation Generally, not enough on the economic side Gender analysis largely missing Trends and indicators not evident Distinction between trends and thresholds
(important for decision making) Thresholds and inertia
Comments from 1st review (2)
Stronger reference to user needs From review to policy relevant assessment Style of writing/length of some chapters
Too theoretical, presentation, weigh and balance Longwinded, difficult to extract main points More clearly need to facilitate the executive
summaries Tone: prescriptive, defeatist, advocacy
Government review organised through CBD National Focal Points
For Netherlands: Annemarie van der Heijden
Directoraat voor Europese SamenwerkingDGES
email: [email protected]
Details on review process by Netherlands Government will follow