25th April 2014

Page 1 of 18

STRATEGY DISCUSSION NOTE

14h International Resource Panel meeting

26-30 May 2014, Santiago, Chile

INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE PANEL

STRATEGY DISCUSSION NOTE ON EMERGING ISSUES AND

PRIORITY AREAS

PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT BASED ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE IRP STRATEGIC

WORKSHOP HELD IN PARIS FROM THE 8th-10th APRIL 2014 AND VALUABLE

INPUTS FROM PANEL MEMBERS AND EXTERNAL EXPERTS

1 Background

1.1 The International Resource Panel : an unique science-policy platform

The International Resource Panel (IRP) was established to provide independent and authoritative scientific assessments on the use of natural resources and resulting environmental impacts.

The Panel contributes to the Science-Policy interface by providing a platform for exchange between eminent scientists from around the world and the policy community. It provides the experts with an insight into the knowledge needs of policy makers, while providing policy makers and other stakeholders with policy-relevant science as a basis for developing sustainable development policies. While the focus is on the natural sciences, the Panel is also composed of economists, political scientists and social scientists, allowing the political, economic or social aspects of each topic to be considered.

The work of the Panel is characterized by systems thinking and a life-cycle perspective in analyzing resource issues. Following its establishment, the Panel first devoted much of its research to issues related to the use, stocks and scarcities of individual resources. Building upon this knowledge base, the Panel is increasingly examining systemic approaches to resource use as well as resource nexus issues.

資料９

Page 2 of 18

Since the International Resource Panel’s launch in 2007, 11 assessments have been published, covering diverse topics such as biofuels, metals stocks and recycling, water accounting, land use, resource use in cities, the multiple benefits of forests, priority economic sectors for sustainable resource management, and the potential for decoupling resource use and related environmental impacts from economic growth.

Current work streams include resource flows in traded goods; inter-linkages between resource use and food systems; global material flows; assessment of soil potential; resource metabolisms of cities; environmental due diligence of greenhouse gas mitigation technologies; and integrated scenarios for future resource use, including nexus between resources.

An overview of published and ongoing assessments is summarized in the table below. More information on published and ongoing assessments can be found in ANNEX I.

Published assessments

Assessing biofuels: towards sustainable production and use of resources published in 2009

Metal stocks in society: scientific synthesis published in 2010

Priority products and materials: assessing the environmental impacts of consumption and production published in 2010

Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth published in 2011

Recycling rates of metals published in 2011

Measuring water use in a green economy published in 2012

City-level decoupling: urban resource flows and the governance of infrastructure transitions published in 2013

Environmental risks and challenges of anthropogenic metals flows and cycles published in 2013

Metal recycling: opportunities, limits, infrastructure published in 2013

Assessing global land use: balancing consumption with sustainable supply published in 2014

Building natural capital: how REDD+ can support a green economy published in 2014

On-going assessments

Decoupling 2: technological opportunities and policy options to be published in 2014

Resources embodied in trade to be published in 2014

Decoupling economic growth from water uses and water pollution to be published in 2015

The benefits, risks, and trade-offs of low-carbon technologies for electricity production to be published in 2015

The benefits, risks, and trade-offs of energy efficiency technologies to be published in 2015

Maintaining and increasing landscape productivity through the application of land potential

evaluation systems to be published in 2015

Assessment of global material flows and resource productivity to be published in 2016

Food systems and natural resources to be published in 2016

Integrated scenario analysis to be published in 2016

資料９

Page 3 of 18

The assessment reports published by the IRP are having a growing impact on policy-development at international, regional, and national levels. The IRP’s findings have been used and referred to by international organisations, national governments, think tanks and research institutions, academia, civil society organisations and businesses in their discussions and decisions on establishing new policies in the area of resource efficiency, sustainable consumption and production and a green economy.

References to the IRP and its assessment reports include:

The draft negotiating text for Rio +20 (March 2012 version).

19th session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)

The High-level Panel on Global Sustainability (GSP)

The OECD in its work on Resource Productivity and Green Growth

The African Development Bank (AfDB) “Resource Efficiency in Africa: Opportunities for Development” (November 2010 in Cape Town)

European Commission’s Roadmap to a Resource Efficiency Europe, Assessment of Resource efficiency Indicators and Targets, and Analysis of Innovation Drivers and barriers in Support of Better Policies (DG Env and DG Enterprise)

World Economic Forum (WEF)

World Resources Forum (WRF)

The Panel’s report on ‘Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth” is most frequently referred to and is perceived as the IRP’s flagship product. After its release in late 2011 it was in the top 10 downloads of UNEP reports for the first half of 2012, and in the top 20 for the second half of 2012.

During the past 12 months the IRP has also been contributing to the UN process to develop Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through the participation of the Co-Chairs and other Panel members in formal and informal meetings for the process, and the development of a ‘think piece’ from the IRP on the importance of sustainable resource management and decoupling for achieving sustainable development as well as suggested targets and indicators on resource productivity. This has gained substantial visibility for the IRP among the international community in addition to informing the process on the importance of having targets and indicators on resource management included as part of the SDGs package. This message has been acknowledged by several Steering Committee representatives as an important contribution to discussions on the SDGs under the scope of the UN GA OWG, and has already influenced the contributions of the German Council of Sustainable Development and German Government to the SDG process.

1.2 The 2014 Strategic Exercise

In accordance with the procedures of the International Resource Panel, every three years the IRP holds a strategic exercise to assess emerging issues and knowledge gaps which could be explored by the Panel and its working groups over the coming years. This allows the IRP to stay abreast of the latest developments in natural resource science while remaining relevant to policy-making for sustainable management of natural resources and environmental sustainability.

The first strategic exercise of the IRP, held in 2011, identified the following priority topics for the IRP:

pricing and governance of natural resources

environmental impacts and resource use of food value chain

resource efficiency in cities

the nexus of various resources

In line with these priorities a first IRP assessment on City-level Decoupling was published in 2013 and the development of a follow-up report examining the resource implications of the second wave of urbanization is currently being considered by the Panel. A new study on Food Systems and Natural Resource Use was initiated, aimed at assessing the current status and dynamics of natural resource use in food systems and their environmental impacts, and at identifying opportunities for resource efficiency improvement in regional

資料９

Page 4 of 18

food systems. A new work stream on integrated scenarios for resource demand, supply, use, environmental implications, interlikages and trade-offs of various resources was also initiated as a collaborative project bringing together the different IRP work streams. No study has specifically focused on resource pricing and economics, although an attempt has been made to strengthen the economic dimension in the IRP’s assessments, where appropriate.

The Strategic Workshop held in Paris from the 8th-10th April 2014 was the first step of the 2014 strategic exercise, and took the form of an initial brainstorming. The exercise assembled experts, policy-makers and other stakeholders (both from within and outside the Panel), to examine key challenges and priorities in terms of resource management and identify potential topics for the IRP’s assessments over the 3-4 years to come. The workshop also examined strengthening the Panel’s impact on policy and enhancing the scientific rigour of its work.

This background paper is based on the deliberations and outcomes of the workshop and is intended to feed into the discussions that will take place at the IRP Strategic Session during the 14th International Resource Panel meeting to be held in Santiago, Chile, 26-30 May 2014.

2 Assessing the IRP niche and relevance

As a fledgling partnership on the science-policy interface in a rapidly changing environment, the IRP needs to regularly review its relevance and effectiveness in light of its mission and mandate. In order to do so it must keep abreast of policy processes and of the latest progress in terms of new findings, methods and methodologies, data and perspectives related to emerging issues on resource use.

The recently held workshop provided an opportunity to review the niche and comparative advantage of the IRP in contributing to global policy processes and in addressing emerging issues and trends in the field of sustainable management of natural resources. The IRP has a niche as the science-policy interface within UNEP’s subprogramme of Resource Efficiency/ Sustainable Consumption and Production. The Panel uses constructive specific approaches and concepts to sustainability (like decoupling, technological and institutional innovations and the DPSIR (Drivers, pressures, states, impacts, responses) framework) that are of interest to the business community, policy makers, and the general public and analyzes a series of resources, sectors and cross-cutting topics.

The work of the Resource Panel entails assessments of the scientific literature and new syntheses and interpretations on resource related issues. All reports of the Panel are peer reviewed and comments of reviewers are addressed systematically before reports are publicly released. In its reports the International Resource Panel stresses risks and uncertainty by using scenario thinking, adopting a life cycle perspective and attempting to find a balance between limits and potentials.

Since the relationship between resource use and environmental impacts is complex and includes many different materials, environmental media, sectors and consumer domains, the Panel needs to have a wide scope. As such, the International Resource Panel examines resources with the highest environmental impacts and greatest potential for improvement. It also uses multiple methods of analysis, including resource and environmental accounting, material flow and life cycle analyses, ecological economics and sufficient broad scientific and institutional knowledge to interpret the implications of its findings.

資料９

Page 5 of 18

The following is a SWOT analysis of the International Resource Panel, based on an exercise carried out during the last strategic exercise in 2011:

The Panel aims at producing timely and sharply focused syntheses of knowledge on topics which rank highly on the societal agenda as related to resource issues and concerns. While the Panel has a credible foundation and has already published a set of important scientific assessments, there is a need to further define its niche and branding as a way to better communicate its added value and strengthen its comparative advantage over other panels, platforms and think-thanks. The following list intends to frame the main elements of the IRP that constitute its comparative advantage and that as such should form an integral part of its branding:

Focus on sustainable resource management, including: - Decoupling (recognizing limits and opportunities) - Resource governance: security, access, equity, efficiency and sustainability - Resource productivity and valuation of resource efficiency technologies - Support transition and transformation to a resource efficient economy - People-centred resource management

Systems thinking, life cycle perspective, integrated and trans-disciplinary approaches, and consideration of nexus issues

Examining problems along with innovative solutions (using hard sciences to identify the problems, and integrating economic, political and social sciences to articulate solutions and opportunities)

Forward-looking approach, aimed at providing solutions before the problems arise and informing long-term strategies for natural resource management

資料９

Page 6 of 18

In addition to these elements, a key added value of the IRP is the successful bridging of science and policy as a means of producing scientific knowledge that is a source of information for informed decision-making and social education in general. Noting that transformative change can only come from a combination of (i) enhanced political will and leadership, and broadest possible agreement in the international community, (ii) solid science research and effective communication and application of results, and (iii) societal engagement and understanding, the IRP needs to target all three areas to ensure the relevance and impact of its findings. In order to further enhance the relevance of its findings to policy-making at the national and regional levels, the IRP may also need to examine how to translate global knowledge into information that will generate local action. This may include the provision of solutions suited to specific target audiences at various levels, so as to further inform and engage the general public, creating the social pressure for policy shifts. In this respect the importance of ensuring transparent, accessible and reliable data and of using existing information networks for dissemination of information cannot be overemphasized.

3 Aligning with current global policy processes and assessing emerging

issues on resource use

There is a need for the Panel to better align its priority setting with emerging needs and trends and with relevant global policy processes. This will allow the IRP to:

ascertain key issues of interest and importance to the international community

support global processes such as the Post-2015 Development Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and ensure these are based on sound science and adequately reflect the importance of sustainable resource management as a powerful driver of economic and social development;

provide opportunities for sharpening the IRP’s focus, organizing research areas and expertise base and disseminating its findings among the international community.

In this regard, key global policy processes include the ongoing proceedings of the UN General Assembly Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals, the Post-2015 Development Agenda and work of the High-Level Panel (HLP) of Eminent Persons. They have highlighted the gravity of resource scarcity and environmental degradation associated with resource use; the severe situation of the poor, who directly depend on natural resources for food, fuel, medicine, shelter and livelihoods, and are disproportionally affected by resource depletion and environmental degradation; and the pivotal role and great potential of technological and institutional innovations in support of the sustainable management of natural resources. Also highly relevant, the 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns (10YFP), adopted at Rio+20, is a key global framework for international cooperation to promote the shift to sustainable consumption and production patterns.

Other key fora and platforms of relevance are the UN Global Compact, the World Economic Forum (WEF), the World Resources Forum, the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD), the South-South Centre/UNCTAD, and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).

The process for developing the Sustainable Development Goals in particular, as a process involving global consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, reflects the current priorities of the international community for sustainable socio-economic development. Based on extensive consultations and inputs, the Tenth session of the UN GA Open Working Group (OWG-10) on Sustainable Development Goals held in New

資料９

Page 7 of 18

York on 31 March – 4 April 2014 considered 19 focal areas for the development of goals and targets. Several of these include explicit references to water efficiency, energy efficiency, energy and resource productivity, and infrastructure efficiency and/or materials productivity. Of the 19 focal areas, at least 12 are related to sustainable resources management1:

UN GA OWG FOCAL AREAS RELATION TO SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Focal area 1: poverty

eradication

Dependence of the poor on natural resources

Extreme poverty as a trigger of overexploitation of renewable resources and of the erosion of

the natural resource base

Potential of sustainable resource management to contribute to poverty eradication and to

resource restoration

Focal area 2: sustainable

agriculture, food security and

nutrition

Improved agricultural productivity through sustainable management of water and land

resources

Improving resource efficiency and promoting sustainable food systems by reducing post-harvest

crop losses and food waste along food supply chains

Nutrient flow management and soil pollution and degradation

Focal area 6: water and

sanitation

Improving water-use efficiency and extending wastewater treatment, recycling and reuse

Bringing fresh water extraction in line with sustainable supply

Appropriate management of related biogeochemical/nutrients cycles

Nexus of water, energy, sanitation

Focal area 7: energy

Focal area 15: climate

Sustainable management of energy resources and improvement of energy efficiency in

buildings, industry, agriculture and transport

Ensuring access to affordable, modern and reliable energy resources for all (important for

poverty eradication, women’s empowerment, and provision of basic services)

Ensure the deployment of cleaner (including low carbon- or zero-emissions energy)

technologies and increase the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix

Focal area 8: economic growth

Focal area 9: industrialization

Focal area 10: infrastructure

Resource and commodity price volatility

Technology cooperation and technology transfer

Improving energy and resource productivity of economic activities

Sustainable industrial development, technological upgrading, eco-efficiency and innovation,

and investments in infrastructure such as roads, railways, ports, electricity, and

communications

Resource requirements and environmental impacts of existing and planned industrial and

infrastructure development

Focal area 13: sustainable cities

and human settlements

Eradicate and prevent slum conditions and improving waste and wastewater management

Need to invest on a massive scale in new urban infrastructures as urban population is projected

to reach 5 billion inhabitants in 2030 and 6.25 billion in 2050

The development of new urban infrastructures with have serious resource implications

Focal area 14: promote

sustainable consumption and

production (SCP)

Need to shift to sustainable consumption and production patterns aimed at the

dematerialization and decarbonisation of the economy while ensuring continuing economic and

employment growth and increasing well-being

Significant improvements in energy efficiency and materials productivity are hallmarks of SCP,

along with preventing, reducing, recycling and reusing waste (waste to resources), and “closed

loop” approaches to production processes

1 see Annex II for more information on the 12 focal areas and their relation to sustainable resource management

資料９

Page 8 of 18

UN GA OWG FOCAL AREAS RELATION TO SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Focal area 16: conservation and

sustainable use of marine

resources, oceans and seas

Need to promote the conservation and sustainable use of vital marine resources such as fish

and fishery products, as well as fossil fuels and minerals

Halting the destruction of marine habitats and regulating harvesting of straddling fish stocks

Protecting marine resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction

Ensuring that undersea minerals and fossil fuels are exploited in a way that will minimize

impacts to the environment

Focal area 17: ecosystem and

biodiversity

Slowing, halting and reversing deforestation and conversion of forests to crop lands

Sustainable forest management

Restoration of degraded forest ecosystems and increasing the area of protected forests

A compilation of goals and targets suggested by the OWG-102 will be discussed for each of the 19 focal/priority areas at the next meeting of UN GA Open Working Group on SDGs (OWG-11) at the UN HQ in New York on 5 May 2014 - 9 May 2014.

The work of the International Resource Panel is extremely relevant to this global and very dynamic policy process. The linkages between decoupling, sustainable resource management and socio-economic development are present under many of the themes, as previously highlighted in the Think Piece the IRP developed to advocate and promote the embedding of the rational management of the natural resource base of economic and social development throughout the Post-2015 development agenda and the SDGs3:

Eradicating absolute poverty – by breaking the vicious circle of entrenched poverty and unsustainable use of natural resources and creating the virtual circle of responsible use, conservation and regeneration of resources and natural capital and poverty eradication

Ensuring food security and nutrition – by adopting sustainable use of land-based resources

Achieving universal access to safe and clean water & sanitation – by enhancing efficient use of water and sustainable management of nutrient flows

Securing universal access to modern energy – by incorporating resource efficient and low carbon energy systems based on renewable energies

Creating sustainable livelihoods and equitable growth – by promoting technologies and innovations for sustainable resource use

The following issues of relevance to sustainable resource management are also embedded in the aforementioned global processes:

Enabling transition to a resource efficient, socially equitable and environmentally sound economy

Resource efficiency and decoupling

Job creation, particularly for youth inclusive and equitable growth and sustainability

Demographic policy in harmony with natural environment

Transparency and accountability

Conflict avoidance

One issue that is prominent in these processes is the relationship between different governance levels as related to the management of resources (common, transboundary, national, local) and the role of governance in improving skills and capacity within government agencies for sustainable resource

2 http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/3698FA%20compilation%20of%20proposals%20from%20OWG_210414.pdf

3 UNEP. International Resource Panel. (2013). Managing and conserving the natural resource base for sustainable economic and social

development

資料９

Page 9 of 18

management, increasing responsibility and transparency, and creating incentives for private actors. The role of change agents in improving sustainability in resource use is also of equal importance.

Given that in many cases policy and regulatory deficits as well as social constraints present more immediate challenges to resource efficiency than physical constraints, the following are important considerations for the IRP to further align its assessment work with current global policy processes and demand:

Examine resource governance, equity, efficiency and sustainability (how governance impacts resource use, as well as how improved governance can be an effective response and promote sustainable resource use)

Address policy and regulatory deficits (which are sometimes more complex than the physical limitations)

Seize opportunities to contribute to relevant international processes, for which resource-related issues are central (SDGs, 10YFP)

Explore different agents as drivers of change, including industry leaders, financial sector and investors

4 Identifying potential priority areas

Along with aligning with current global policy processes and demand come ample opportunities for the IRP to

identify potential priority areas and assert itself with the development of assessment reports of high quality

in terms of both scientific robustness and policy relevance.

Potential priority areas for IRP assessment work need to take into account the above mentioned criteria

established by the Panel during its 2011 Strategic Exercise (replicated below), and be tackled also from an

economic and social dimension, while grounded in physical science.

Criteria for selection of potential work areas :

Magnitude and range of challenge, solution and impact (global, continent, economy wide and eco-system)

Urgency

Policy Relevance/Applicability/Practical Feasibility/Specificity, Conditions for implementation

Scientific Interest

Data availability, knowledge gaps and needs

People orientation: social dimension, poverty, health, jobs, intra and inter generation equity, safety net

Limits, trade-offs between different options and impacts, prevention and mitigation of unintended consequences

Missing links in scientific assessment landscape

Taking into account (i) the above criteria, (ii) current demand and global policy processes, (iii) emerging issues

highlighted in past IRP strategic discussions, as well as (iv) the niche and comparative advantage of the Panel

in addressing these issues, a number of emerging issues can be identified:

1. Resource nexus issues: including the inter-linkages between energy, water, and land. Potential

opportunities for the IRP could include looking into the possibility of developing a periodic

assessment report on resource nexus issues (i.e. a flagship report on the state of the world on

resource nexus issues) focused on particular resource inter-linkages such as the energy-land-water

nexus.

2. Governance for sustainable resource management: including both global and regional governance

systems, and also transboundary resource management. Possible opportunities for the IRP could

include looking at resource efficiency targets and related metrics/indicators, and elements of a

resource efficiency/circular economy roadmap.

資料９

Page 10 of 18

3. Resource management and poverty 4 : including resource availability and accessibility, land

degradation and the poverty cycle, and resource regeneration. Possible assessment opportunities

include examining the real scale of impacts of unsustainable management of natural resources and

resource depletion on the poor, and the potential of sustainable resource management to contribute

to poverty eradication and to improved access to natural resources. Another suggested angle is

looking at how can poverty eradication efforts can promote the restoration of the natural resource

base.

4. Resource economics: including the interplay between the economy, resource prices, resource

productivity and equity issues. Specific topics that would be examined include resource rents,

subsidies and taxes, and labour v. resource productivity, challenging conventional economics (and its

assumption of resource abundance), measuring progress beyond GDP, and the economic,

environmental and social costs of inaction.

5. Cities and urbanisation: including resource requirements of future urbanization5, the relationship

between urban areas and their hinterlands (and other supply areas), multi-functionality of land, and

regenerative cities. Possible opportunities for the IRP include looking at the resource and governance

implications (including construction materials) of future urbanization under a BAU approach

compared to a transition to more sustainable approaches resulting in the decoupling of urban

growth rates from rising rates of resource use (this is the approach of the current proposal put

forward for the follow-up work on cities in the IRP). Another opportunity lies in looking at how a

better understanding of the relationship between cities and their supply areas can be used to

improve resource productivity and can also contribute to resource regeneration and restoration of

degraded land.

6. Energy: including long-term perspectives for and access to both renewable and non-renewable

energy resources. Possible opportunities for the IRP including looking at renewables v. fossil fuels, at

access to energy resources by the poor, and at short-term risks and opportunities of unconventional

fuels.

7. Innovation: including remanufacturing6, re-use, recycling and resource substitution7, and digital

economies. Decoupling relies on innovations: technological improvements and societal changes

4 The report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda: reiterates that the poor directly depend on

natural resources, for food, fuel, medicine, shelter and livelihoods, and are especially affected by resource depletion and environmental

degradation.

5 Since 2007, more than half of humanity lives in cities. Urbanization will face unknown levels in the next decades: the urban population is

projected to reach 5 billion inhabitants in 2030 and 6.25 billion in 2050 (i.e. 70% of humanity). In the next 20 years, 1.5 billion new urban

dwellers will appear. This urbanization process fast outreaches infrastructural development.

6 Remanufacturing is based in the economical return and collection of used or end-of-life products which are then restored to like-new

conditions (enabling closed-loop systems).It is an innovative approach to resource efficiency allowing reductions in the amount of raw material

used in manufacturing (average remanufactured product has 70 to 90% restored components by weight) as well as reductions in industrial

waste generated and energy used.

7 Resource substitution (replacing resources used in manufacturing by others that are less material-intensive/less energy-intensive/non-toxic

and/or ) renewable) relies on innovations in product design and manufacturing processes.

資料９

Page 11 of 18

enabling a more efficient or different use of resources. Possible opportunities for the IRP could

include examining the scale and potential of innovative approaches like remanufacturing and

resource substitution in reducing resource demand and environmental impacts associated with

primary material-based manufacturing. Other opportunities lie in further exploring the potentials of

resource re-use and of recycling technologies, and the resource implications of digital economies.

8. Marine and aquatic resources, including non-biotic marine resources such as deep sea minerals and

fossil fuels8: In terms of biotic marine resources, possible opportunities for the IRP could include

exploring how marine and aquatic resources can be exploited to satisfy the growing demand for food

and non-food biomass9 without leading to long term degradation and loss of biodiversity. In terms of

abiotic resources, the IRP could examine the potentials of resource efficiency for the sustainable

management of deep sea mineral resources while minimizing environmental impacts of marine

energy technologies, deep sea exploration, drilling and mining.

9. Biogeochemical nutrient cycles10 (including links to wastewater treatment and sludge management):

Possible opportunities for the IRP could include looking into how water, soil and nutrient cycles can

be managed to provide the growing demand for water, food, feed, fuel and fibre while mitigating

negative impacts of anthropogenic nutrient flows (including impacts on water resources and

sanitation). Other possible opportunity could be to examine the resource constraints of

phosphorus11 use in food production and the potential resource productivity gains “from mine to

field to fork”.

10. Resource consumption and lifestyles: including the links between growing environmental impacts,

increasing income, and population growth. Potential opportunities for the IRP could include looking

at specific decoupling policies with a focus on sustainable consumption and life style changes.

8 More than a third of the oil and gas extracted worldwide comes from offshore sources. Extensive underwater mineral-rich deposits have

already been identified that could be exploited to yield copper, gold, manganese, nickel, cobalt and other valuable metals

9 Fish and fishery products provide over 15% of the world population’s intake of animal protein, and significant amounts are used for animal

feed and pharmaceutical uses. Over 80% of fish populations are either fully fished (57% of stocks) or overfished (30% of stocks)

10 Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) are two key bio-geochemical cycles for which Rockström et al (2009) suggest a planetary boundary should

be set due to the related environmental impacts. The boundary suggested for N is actually already trespassed. N and P cycles are closely inter-

connected with all other cycles (e.g. Water cycle; Sediments cycle): a disruption in one cycle disturbs other cycles and causes damage to

resources and living organisms

11 P is a key nutrient with no substitute in agriculture and food production, and its main source (phosphate rock) is a non-renewable resource

資料９

Page 12 of 18

Considering synergies and overlaps between these emerging issues, as well as specific resource issues and

cross-cutting considerations, a number of potential priority areas can be identified. These are captured in

the table below for consideration by the Panel and its Steering Committee for possible future assessment

work.

Potential priority areas Resource issues

covered

Cross-cutting considerations

Resource Nexus Energy, water, land, food, materials

Inter-linkages between resources / resource nexus issues

Innovation for a circular economy: remanufacturing, re-use, recycling and material substitution

materials, energy, water, plastics

Resource economics, including resource prices and subsidies

Technological and institutional innovations

Inter-linkages between resources / resource nexus issues

Bio-geo-chemical nutrient cycles, including impacts of anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus flows on water resources and sanitation

nitrogen, phosphorus, water, soil management, water-energy nexus

Interlinkages with water, land and soils

Human society and natural environment

Marine resources, including biotic resources (fish and fishery products) and abiotic (oil, gas and minerals in seabed)

food and non-food biomass; deep sea fossil fuels and minerals marine pollution

Nutrition intake and poverty eradication

Resource governance

Cities and urbanization, including resource requirements of future urbanization and the relationship between urban areas and their hinterlands

materials, energy, water, land

Interlinkages between resources / resource nexus issues

Resource regeneration

Resource consumption and lifestyles

Resource management and poverty eradication, including resource availability and accessibility, land degradation and the poverty cycle, and resource regeneration

materials, energy, water, land

Interlinkages between resources / resource nexus issues

Resource regeneration

Resource management as a driver for poverty eradication

Governance for sustainable resource management including global and regional governance systems, and transboundary resource management

materials, energy, water, land

Governance of resources at different levels (global, regional, national)

Resource economics, including the interplay between the economy, resource productivity, resource prices, and equity issues

Interlinkages between resources / resource nexus issues

資料９

Page 13 of 18

ANNEX I: Published and ongoing assessments of the International

Resource Panel

Published scientific assessments of the International Resource Panel

Assessing biofuels: towards sustainable production and use of resources (2009) Biofuels were introduced as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. However, in order to be effective in mitigating climate change, biofuels need to be assessed on a case by case basis to ensure that major trade-offs are not introduced. This report provides examples of good and bad practices. For example, substituting sugarcane for petrol can lead to emissions reductions of between 70 per cent and more than 100 per cent. However, the production and use of biodiesel from palm oil on deforested peatlands in the tropics can result in increases in greenhouse gas emissions of up to 2000 per cent when compared with fossil fuels. Using life cycle assessment methodologies, land and water trade-offs can also be quantified. Priority products and materials: assessing the environmental impacts of consumption and production (2010) This report identifies priorities among global consumption activities, industrial sectors and materials from primary industries, in terms of their environmental impacts and resource use. The report shows that fossil fuel use and agriculture cause the greatest environmental impacts. Current patterns of production and consumption of fossil fuels and food are draining freshwater supplies, triggering losses of economically important ecosystems, such as forests, intensifying disease and death rates and raising levels of pollution to unsustainable levels. The report concludes that dramatically reforming, re-thinking and redesigning the energy and agriculture sectors could generate significant environmental, social and economic returns. Metal stocks in society: a scientific synthesis (2010) The continued increase in the use of metals over the 20th century has led to a substantial shift from a geological resource base to metal stocks being in use within society. From a compilation of 54 studies, it is clear that a reasonably detailed picture of in-use stocks and in-use lifetimes exists for only five metals: aluminium, copper, iron, lead and zinc. Reliable data on metals stocks in society and their lifetimes are essential for building a global recycling infrastructure in the future. Recycling rates of metals: A status report (2011) Recycling rates of metals are in many cases far lower than their potential for reuse. Less than one-third of some 60 metals studied have an end-of-life recycling rate above 50 per cent and 34 elements have a recycling rate that is below one per cent. However, many of these metals are crucial to the clean technologies we need to reduce fossil-fuel emissions, such as batteries for hybrid cars and magnets in wind turbines. Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth (2011) By 2050, humanity could consume an estimated 140 billion tons of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and biomass per year unless the global economic growth is ‘decoupled’ from that of natural resource consumption. This equates to a rate of consumption three times greater than at the present time. The world is already running out of cheap and high-quality sources of some essential materials including oil, copper and gold; supplying them requires ever-rising volumes of fossil fuels and freshwater. Improving resource productivity, so we do ‘more with less’ faster than the economic growth rate, is the notion behind decoupling.

資料９

Page 14 of 18

Measuring Water Use in a Green Economy (2012) Humanity's key challenge over the coming decades will be to meet the water, energy, land and material needs of up to 9 billion people. A key factor in determining which solution is most appropriate will be the availability of data and information – how much water is available and how it is being used and the frameworks for assessing the distributional needs of each society. This report looks at improving the quality of water accounts, and considers the important differences between territorial and consumption based water accounting. City-level Decoupling: Urban Resource Flows and the Governance of Infrastructure Transitions (2013) The report explores how infrastructure directs material flows and therefore resource use, productivity and efficiency in an urban context. It makes the case for examining cities from a material flow perspective, while also placing the city within the broader system of flows that make it possible for it to function. It also highlights the way that the design, construction and operation of infrastructures create a socio-technical environment that shapes the way of life of citizens and how they procure, use and dispose of resources. A set of 30 case studies provide examples of innovative approaches to sustainable infrastructure change across a broad range of urban contexts. Metal Recycling: Opportunities, Limits, Infrastructure (2013) This report follows the IRP’s first report on recycling, which has demonstrated the status quo of global recycling rates for sixty metals. Product-Centric recycling is discussed in this report by acknowledged experts. This approach is considered to be an essential enabler of resource efficiency by increasing recycling rates. Due to complex functionality, modern products contain complex mixes of almost any imaginable metal, material and compound. This report provides a techno-economic, product design and physics basis to address the challenges of recycling these increasingly complex products in the 21st century. Environmental Risks and Challenges of Anthropogenic Metals Flows and Cycles (2013) This report, compiled by a group of international experts, focuses on the impact of metals on the environment as well as on their life cycle energy use. Currently, primary metals production is responsible for 7 – 8 % of the total global energy use as well as for severe local environmental impacts. The report suggests to apply best available techniques and to increase recycling of metals, which not only requires significantly less energy per kg metal produced than primary production but also helps decreasing the overall local impacts of mining. However, even if recycling rates are increased, rising global demand for many metals will remain a huge environmental challenge in the next decades worldwide. Assessing Global Land Use: Balancing consumption with sustainable supply (2014) This report explores how the management of land-based biomass production and consumption can be developed towards a higher degree of sustainability across different scales: from the sustainable management of soils on the field to the sustainable management of global land use as a whole. A central question posed by the authors is to what extent global cropland can expand to serve the growing demand for food and non-food biomass, while keeping the consequences of land use change, such as losses of biodiversity, at a tolerable level. The assessment looks at the impacts of global trends—population growth, urbanization, and changes in diets and consumption behaviors—on global land use dynamics, considering the consequences for biodiversity, the supply of food, fibers and fuel, and the long-lasting implications for resource security. Building Natural Capital: How REDD+ Can Support a Green Economy (2014) The report describes the multiple values of forests beyond carbon sequestration. It advocates placing REDD+ into a larger landscape-scale planning framework that should involve multiple sectors (especially those that are driving deforestation, sometimes inadvertently). This would go beyond forests to also serve the needs of energy, water resources, agriculture, finance, transport, industry, trade, cities, and ultimately benefit many sectors of a modern economy.

資料９

Page 15 of 18

Ongoing work streams of the International Resource Panel

Decoupling: Technological Opportunities and Policy Options: Following from the IRP’s first flagship report on Decoupling environmental impacts and resource use from

economic growth, the Decoupling: Technological opportunities and Policy options, this report examines success stories in terms of decoupling policies, and presents innovative technologies and policies already in use in different countries. The report highlights investment opportunities that are available through decoupling, but that are not currently taking place at a significant level. It argues that taxes on resource consumption could provide the necessary incentives and economic predictability required for such investment. In order to avoid the Jevons Paradox, whereby as resource consumption decreases, consumption rises, resource prices would need to rise in proportion to documented efficiency increases. Certain measures could be envisaged in order to avoid burden shifting through the emigration of energy intensive activities to other countries, such as using the tax revenues to invest in those sectors or through reduced employer contributions, shifting the financial burden between labour and resources.

Integrated scenarios of future resource demand: This work stream is the subject of a collaborative project among various IRP working groups to develop a set of integrated scenarios on resource demand, supply, use, and their possible environmental implications, considering all major types of resources (e.g., metals, energy, water), as well as their inter-linkages (for example, how one type of resource may have negative impacts on other types of resources). The project will provide a basis for policy options and recommendations from an integrated perspective on resource limits and decoupling, in addition to fostering increased collaboration among different IRP working groups on scenarios-related issues towards improving the coherence in IRP reports and messages on resource-related concerns and possible trade-offs in resource use. Material flow database and analysis: The work stream will assess the historical and current state of global material use for all major natural resources and provide a set of high level indicators for policy planning and policy evaluation. The current state of methodological compatibility and harmonization among different global and regional studies and datasets will be assessed and critical areas for methodological development identified. As a by-product of the assessment, a global Material Flow and Resource Productivity database will be developed. This will help to assess the existing knowledgebase on drivers of material use and on projections for future global material use. The degree to which national governments have invested in high-level policy frameworks and strategies, as well as policies to increase the efficiency of material use at national and regional scales will also be assessed. Maintaining and Increasing Landscape Productivity through the Application of Land Potential Evaluation Systems: The objective of the report will be a) to review existing and emerging land potential evaluation systems (focusing on systems that address the potential to support agricultural production, while also providing an overview of those that address other ecosystem services); b) to define principles and strategies for improving the next generation of these systems, with an increased emphasis on ecosystem resilience; and c) identify policy options for increasing value and application of these systems to land use planning and management, including increasing innovation as a means to increase land potential. Food Systems and natural resources: The IRP study on food systems and natural resources aims at: (1) assessing the current status and dynamics of natural resource use in food systems and their environmental impacts; and (2) identifying opportunities for resource efficiency improvement in regional food systems. The assessment of pressures and opportunities from the field to the fork will bring systems based scientific input to decision makers who wish to build sound food security strategies.

資料９

Page 16 of 18

Environmental benefits, risks, and trade-offs of Greenhouse Gas mitigation technologies: This work stream analysis the environmental impacts of various GHG mitigation technologies, in terms of GHG mitigation potential, water use, land use, toxicity, impacts on biodiversity and material use.

- Part I examines electricity production technologies or ‘supply-side’ technologies, including photovoltaic solar power, Concentrated Solar Power (CSP), hydropower, geothermal, wind power, fossil fuels with and without Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS).

- Part II examines various energy efficiency technologies, clustered under a) building, b) mobility, and c) industry.

Resource Dimensions of International Trade: This assessment examines trade in natural resources and derived commodities and their upstream requirements (in terms of land, water, emissions, etc.), including biomass, fossil fuels, and metals and minerals. Initial conclusions demonstrate that the character and impact of trade is undergoing major structural changes. The report will claim that the 20th century was very much characterized by a link between trade and uneven development. However, since the turn of the century the world is faced with what UNDP has called the “insurrection of the South”, when the South suddenly plays a very important role as a consumer and importer of resources. Preliminary conclusions show a very uneven distribution of production capacity increasingly requires trade as a balancing mechanism of supply and demand. Decoupling economic growth from water uses and water pollution: This report draws upon the conceptual definitions of decoupling already established by the IRP to assess innovative approaches to increasing water efficiency and productivity in the water sector. It examines key policy enablers for decoupling in the water sector, including rebalancing economic incentives for efficient water use and reductions in water pollution, explicit inclusion of water within trade, as well as non-economic incentives such as public awareness creation and education to treat water as a scarce resource that needs to be conserved. Future of the International Resource Panel’s work on urban-related issues: A study proposal is currently under preparation for an assessment on the Resource Implications of Future Urbanisation, which would examine the financial and resource implications of projected urbanisation trends. This would require examining data for inputs and outputs of water, groundwater, energy, waste, construction materials, etc., examining what goes in, what flows out, and what sits in the system, and therefore to what extent decoupling can be achieved. The approach would be multi-layered and targeted towards both national and city-level governments.

資料９

Page 17 of 18

ANNEX II: focal/priority areas considered by the UN GA OWG on SDGs

and their relation to sustainable resources management

Based on extensive consultations and inputs, the Tenth session of the UN GA Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals held in New York on 31 March - 4 April 2014 considered 19 focal/priority areas for the development of goals and targets. Several of these include explicit references to water efficiency, energy efficiency, energy & resource productivity, infrastructure efficiency and/or materials productivity, and of the 19 focal/priority areas, the following 12 are related to sustainable resources management:

Focal/priority area 1 (poverty eradication): eradication of poverty, in all its multi-dimensional forms remains the overriding priority and a necessary condition for sustainable development. The report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda reiterates that the poor directly depend on natural resources, for food, fuel, medicine, shelter and livelihoods, and are especially affected by resource depletion and environmental degradation. While the poorer communities often depend on direct access to local resources for their sustenance, extreme poverty can trigger overexploitation of renewable resources past sustainable levels and result in the erosion of the natural resource base. There is a need to understand how sustainable resource management can both contribute to poverty eradication and to resource restoration.

Focal/priority area 2 (sustainable agriculture, food security and nutrition): increasing the productivity of agriculture sustainably and improving food systems are important for economic wellbeing as well as for ensuring food security and nutrition, realization of the right to adequate food and eradication of hunger. Improved agricultural productivity (including through adequate irrigation, seeds and fertilizers, while in parallel halting and reversing land degradation, drought and desertification) is directly related to the sustainable management of water and land resources. Reducing post-harvest crop losses and food waste along food supply chains are also important aspects of resource efficiency and of sustainable food systems.

Focal/priority area 6 (water and sanitation): For a water-secure world and for the realization of the right to safe drinking water and sanitation, the whole water cycle (along with related biogeochemical cycles) has to be taken into consideration to tackle water-related challenges. Improving water-use efficiency and extending wastewater treatment, recycling and reuse are important aspects of sustainable resources management, along with policy actions aimed at bringing fresh water extraction in line with sustainable supply. Appropriate management of related nutrients cycles are also important to mitigate impacts on water and sanitation systems.

Focal/priority areas 7 (energy) and 15 (climate): sustainable management of energy resources and the improvement of energy efficiency in buildings, industry, agriculture and transport will play a critical role in long-term economic and social development. Ensuring access to affordable, modern and reliable energy resources for all is also important for poverty eradication, women’s empowerment, and provision of basic services. In parallel, there is a need to ensure the deployment of cleaner (including low carbon- or zero-emissions energy) technologies and increase the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix so as to limit the increase of greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change.

Focal/priority areas 8 (economic growth), 9 (industrialization) and 10 (infrastructure): achieving sustained and inclusive economic growth for sustainable development remains the surest means of eradicating poverty and attaining shared prosperity. At the same time, growth should be pursued in ways that brings beneficial environmental and social impacts through, for instance, substantially improving energy and resource productivity of economic activities. Structural transformation through sustainable industrial development and investments in infrastructure such as roads, railways, ports, electricity, and

資料９

Page 18 of 18

communications will drive growth in productivity, employment creation and improvement of living standards, fostering economic diversification and technological upgrading. On the other hand, the resource requirements and environmental impacts of existing and planned industrial and infrastructure development need to be taken into account in terms of tradeoffs between socio-economic and environmental protection goals. Decoupling industrial and infrastructure development from escalating resource use and degradation of the natural resource base will be prerequisites of sustainable development.

Focal/priority area 13 (sustainable cities and human settlements): building sustainable cities as well as decent and affordable human settlements for all, including for indigenous peoples, and the realization of the right to adequate housing remain important undertakings for sustainable development. But as urban populations expand, cities in both developed and developing countries are facing the need to invest on a massive scale in new urban infrastructures. With urban population projected to reach 5 billion inhabitants in 2030 and 6.25 billion in 2050, the development of new urban infrastructures with have serious resource implications.

Focal/priority area 14 (promote sustainable consumption and production/SCP): attaining sustainable consumption and production patterns is vital in securing a decent standard of living for all and in ensuring the long-term provision of human needs, while at the same time addressing resource depletion and environmental degradation. Developed countries are poised to lead a shift to sustainable consumption and production patterns aimed at the dematerialization and decarbonisation of the economy while ensuring continuing economic and employment growth and increasing well-being. Decoupling resource use and environmental degradation from growth and well-being will benefit developed and developing countries alike. The 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns (10YFP) adopted at Rio+20 is the principal framework for international cooperation to promote the shift to SCP patterns. Significantly improvements in energy efficiency and materials productivity are hallmarks of SCP, along with preventing, reducing, recycling and reusing waste (waste to resources), and “closed loop” approaches to production processes.

Focal/priority area 16 (conservation and sustainable use of marine resources, oceans and seas): the conservation and sustainable use of marine resources, oceans and seas ensures the provision of economic and social benefits and ecosystem services to humankind: provision of vital natural resources such as fish and fishery products, as well as fossil fuels and minerals. But the sustainable management of marine resources requires, among other measures, halting the destruction of marine habitats, regulating harvesting of straddling fish stocks, protecting marine resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and ensuring that undersea minerals and fossil fuels are exploited in a way that will minimize impacts to the environment.

Focal/priority area 17 (ecosystem and biodiversity): humans are fundamentally dependent on the capacity of ecosystems for life and to provide services for their well-being and societal development. Ensuring fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the utilization of genetic resources is, as such, an important social goal. Slowing, halting and reversing deforestation and conversion of forests to crop lands are important measures to preserve these resources, along with sustainable forest management and the restoration of degraded forest ecosystems and increasing the area of protected forests.

資料９