millennium ecosystem assessment: - overview of findings and millennium development...

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: - Overview of Findings and Millennium Development Goals(MDGs)- Sustainability Development Goals(SDGs) Now, In transition

What is the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment? Largest assessment ever undertaken of the health of ecosystems Prepared by 1360 experts from 95 countries; extensive peer review Consensus of the worlds scientists Designed to meet needs of decision- makers among government, business, civil society Information requested through 4 international conventions

A social process designed to bring the findings of science to bear on the needs of decision-makers Monitoring Research Decision-makers Governments Private Sector Civil Society Individuals Science Assessment Assessment Science A scientific assessment applies the judgment of experts to existing knowledge to provide scientifically credible answers to policy relevant questions

Criteria for successful assessments Political Legitimacy Scientific Credibility Saliency Focus on User Needs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Regulating Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem processes Cultural Non-material benefits from ecosystems Provisioning Goods produced or provided by ecosystems What was unique? Ecosystem services Photo credits (left to right, top to bottom): Purdue University, WomenAid.org, LSUP, NASA, unknown, CEH Wallingford, unknown, W. Reid, Staffan Widstrand

Provisioning Services Food Crops Livestock Capture Fisheries Aquaculture Wild Foods Fiber Timber Cotton, hemp, silk Wood Fuel Genetic resources Biochemicals Freshwater Goods produced or provided by ecosystems Photo credit (top): Tran Thi Hoa (World Bank),

Regulating Services Air Quality Regulation Climate Regulation Global (CO 2 sequestration) Regional and local Erosion regulation Water purification Disease regulation Pest regulation Pollination Natural Hazard regulation Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem processes

Cultural Services Spiritual and Religious Values Knowledge Systems Educational values Inspiration Aesthetic Values Social Relations Sense of Place Recreation and Ecotourism Non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems Photo credits ( top to bottom): W. Reid, Mary Frost, Staffan Widstrand, unknown.

Direct Drivers Indirect Drivers Ecosystem Services Human Well-being Direct Drivers of Change Changes in land use Species introduction or removal Technology adaptation and use External inputs (e.g., irrigation) Resource consumption Climate change Natural physical and biological drivers (e.g., volcanoes) Indirect Drivers of Change Demographic Economic (globalization, trade, market and policy framework) Sociopolitical (governance and institutional framework) Science and Technology Cultural and Religious Human Well-being and Poverty Reduction Basic material for a good life Health Good Social Relations Security Freedom of choice and action Life on Earth: Biodiversity MA Conceptual Framework

What was unique? Multi-Scale Assessment

Southern Africa Millennium Assessment SADC regionDrainage basins Zambezi Gariep Local assessments

Asian Cases Far east region Drainage basins Local assessments Amur Basin Mekong Basin

Why a Multi-Scale Assessment? Regional Users Regional Development Banks, etc. National Government Local Community Global Assessment National Local Rationale Characteristic scale of processes Greater resolution at smaller scales Independent validation of conclusions Response options matched to the scale where decision-making takes place Expect that findings at any scale of a multi-scale assessment will be improved by information and perspectives from other scales

Core Questions 1.What is the rate and scale of ecosystem change? 2.What are the consequences of ecosystem change for the services provided by ecosystems and for human- well being? 3.How might ecosystems and their services change over the next 50 years? 4.What options exist to conserve ecosystems and enhance their contributions to human well-being?

Main Findings 1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.

1 billion in 1800 4 billion in 1975 2 billion in 1920 6.5 billion in 2005 World Population (billions) Source: UN Population Division 2004; Lee, 2003; Population Reference Bureau

$1 trillion in 1900 $10 trillion in 1967 $52 trillion in 2003 World GDP (trillion 1990 dollars) Source: DeLong 1998

Source: NASA

Temperate Grasslands & Woodlands Temperate Broadleaf Forest Tropical Dry Forest Tropical Grasslands Tropical Coniferous Forest Mediterranean Forests Tropical Moist Forest 0 50 100 Percent of habitat (biome) remaining Habitat Loss to 1990 Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Year of Peak Fish Harvest Harvest peak Pre-peak Post-peak Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and Sea Around Us project

20% of the worlds coral reefs were lost and more than 20% degraded 35% of mangrove area has been lost in the last several decades Amount of water in reservoirs quadrupled since 1960 Scale of Change

Fossil Fuels Agroecosystems Fertilizer Total Human Additions Natural Sources Teragrams of Nitrogen per Year Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Percent Increase in Nitrogen Flows in Rivers Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone Source: NOAA

CO 2 Concentration (ppm) Source: Keeling and Whorf, 2005.

Global Surface Temperature ( o C) Relative to 1890-1900 mean Source: Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

The Balance Sheet Crops Livestock Aquaculture Carbon sequestration Capture fisheries Wild foods Wood fuel Genetic resources Biochemicals Fresh Water Air quality regulation Regional & local climate regulation Erosion regulation Water purification Pest regulation Pollination Natural Hazard regulation Spiritual & religious Aesthetic values Timber Fiber Water regulation Disease regulation Recreation & ecotourism EnhancedDegradedMixed Bottom Line: 60% of Ecosystem Services are Degraded

Change in Species Diversity Number per Thousand Species Extinctions (per thousand years) 1790 1900 2000 Number of Species Homogenization (e.g. growth in marine species introductions) North America Europe 100 to 1000- fold increase Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Main Findings 1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years. 2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals. Degradation of many ecosystem services Increased risk of abrupt changes in ecosystems Growing harm to poor people

Crops Livestock Aquaculture Carbon sequestration Capture fisheries Wild foods Wood fuel Genetic resources Biochemicals Fresh Water Air quality regulation Regional & local climate regulation Erosion regulation Water purification Pest regulation Pollination Natural Hazard regulation Spiritual & religious Aesthetic values Timber Fiber Water regulation Disease regulation Recreation & ecotourism EnhancedDegradedMixed The Balance Sheet

Crops Status: Enhanced Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Capture FisheriesStatus: Degraded Photo Credit (left): UNEP

Biomass of Table Fish (tons per km 2 ) Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; Christensen et al. 2003 19002000

Source: FAO 2000 Status of Marine Fish Stocks

FreshwaterStatus: Degraded 1535% of Irrigation Withdrawals Unsustainable (low to medium certainty)

Natural Hazard Regulation Status: Degraded Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Land Use Fossil Fuel Atmosphere Oceans Terrestrial Climate Regulation (Global)Status: Enhanced Peta grams carbon Sources and Sinks of Carbon over Past Two Centuries Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Terrestrial ecosystems have been net carbon sink since mid-1990s, but previously were net carbon source

Land Use Fossil Fuel Atmosphere Oceans Terrestrial Gigatons carbon per year Sources and Sinks of Carbon in 1990s Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Climate Regulation (Global)Status: Enhanced

Increased likelihood of abrupt changes (established but incomplete evidence) Fisheries collapse Eutrophication Coral reef regime shifts Disease emergence Species introductions Regional climate change Atlantic Cod off Newfoundland

Economic and health costs of degradation can be substantial Cost of damage of UK agriculture to other ecosystem services Cost of collapse of the cod fishery in Canada Introduction of Zebra mussels into aquatic ecosystems in the US $2.6 billion (10% of farm receipts) $2 billion in income support and retraining; loss of tens of thousands of jobs $100 million annual costs to power industry

Cultural Regulating Provisioning Provisioning services are being enhanced at the cost of regulating & cultural services Provisioning Regulating Cultural Crops Livestock Aquaculture Carbon sequestration Capture fisheries Wild foods Wood fuel Genetic resources Biochemicals Fresh Water Air quality regulation Regional & local climate regulation Erosion regulation Water purification Pest regulation Pollination Natural Hazard regulation Spiritual & religious Aesthetic values Timber Fiber Water regulation Disease regulation Recreation & ecotourism EnhancedDegradedMixed Trade-offs Among Services

Mangrove ecosystem shrimp housing crops Mangrove Services: nursery and adult fishery habitat fuelwood & timber carbon sequestration traps sediment detoxifies pollutants protection from erosion & disaster Trade-offs among ecosystem services

Economic Value ($ per hectare) Forests in ItalyForests in Croatia Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Economic value of non-marketed services can be high Photo: W. Reid

Value (per hectare) 0 $2000 $4000 Mangrove Shrimp Farm Coastal Protection (~$3,840) Timber and Non- timber products ($90) Fishery nursery ($70) Net: $2,000 (Gross $17,900 less costs of $15,900) Pollution Costs (-$230) Less subsidies (-$1,700) Restoration (-$8,240) Mangrove Conversion Private Net Present Value per hectare Mangrove: $91 Shrimp Farm: $2000 1987 1999 Public Net Present Value per hectare Mangrove: $1,000 to $3,600 Shrimp Farm: $-5,400 to $200 Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; Sathirathai and Barbier 2001 Source: UNEP

Fiber Food Spiritual & religious Freshwater Genetic Resources Climate regulation Water purification Disease regulation Flood/Fire regulation Recreation & tourism Aesthetic Economic Value ($) Economic Valuation Difficult or impossible Easy Private Benefit Capture Difficult Easy ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Many services are public goods

Impact on Poor and Marginalized People Poor people are most dependent on ecosystem services and most vulnerable to degradation of the services Photo credit: Uittapron Juntawonsup/UNEP

Per capita food production declining in sub-Saharan Africa Number of undernourished people worldwide increasing Water scarcity affects 1 in every 3 people worldwide 1.1 billion people lack access to improved water supply Half the developing country urban population suffers from diseases associated with water and sanitation Malaria responsible for 11% of the burden of disease in Africa Impact on Poor and Marginalized People

Critical concern drylands 40% of land surface and more than 2 billion inhabitants Lowest levels of human well- being 10-20% of drylands degraded Only 8% of renewable water supply

Dryland Systems: Highest population growth in 1990s Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Main Findings 1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years. 2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals. 3. Degradation of ecosystems could grow worse but can be reversed.

Order from Strength Adapting Mosaic Global Orchestration TechnoGarden Globalization Regionalization World Development Environmental Management Proactive Reactive MA Scenarios

Scenario Storylines Global Orchestration Globally connected society that focuses on global trade and economic liberalization and takes a reactive approach to ecosystem problems but that also takes strong steps to reduce poverty and inequality and to invest in public goods such as infrastructure and education. Order from Strength Regionalized and fragmented world, concerned with security and protection, emphasizing primarily regional markets, paying little attention to public goods, and taking a reactive approach to ecosystem problems.

Scenario Storylines Adapting Mosaic Regional watershed-scale ecosystems are the focus of political and economic activity. Local institutions are strengthened and local ecosystem management strategies are common; societies develop a strongly proactive approach to the management of ecosystems. TechnoGarden Globally connected world relying strongly on environmentally sound technology, using highly managed, often engineered, ecosystems to deliver ecosystem services, and taking a proactive approach to the management of ecosystems in an effort to avoid problems.

Trends in Drivers Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Million sq. km Developing regions Industrialized regions Change in Agricultural Land Under MA Scenarios Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Temperate Broadleaf Forest Tropical Dry Forest Tropical Grasslands Tropical Coniferous Forest Mediterranean Forests Tropical Moist Forest 0 50 100 Percent of habitat (biome) remaining Habitat Loss to 1990 Habitat Loss to 2050 under MA Scenarios Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Temperate Grasslands & Woodlands

Fossil Fuels Agroecosystems Fertilizer Total Human Additions Natural Sources Teragrams of Nitrogen per Year Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Temperature Change ( o C) from 1990 A: Observations, Northern Hemisphere, Proxy data B: Global Instrumental Observations C: IPCC 2001 Scenario Projections (SRES) A B C 1.5 5.7 o C Source: IPCC 2001

MA Scenarios 100 50 0 Percent Change by 2050 Food Demand 70-85% Water Withdrawal 30-85% Species Loss 10-15% (low certainty)

Global Orchestration Lower population Lower habitat loss Higher economic growth Higher GHG emissions Global, Reactive environmental policies Population Scenarios

TechnoGarden Best GHG Best Nitrogen Best Water Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration Reliability of ecosystem services decreased, risks increased New problems emerge from technologies Global, Proactive environmental policies

Adapting Mosaic Best GHG Best Nitrogen Best Water Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration Reliability of ecosystem services decreased, risks increased New problems emerge from technologies Regionalized, Proactive environmental policies

Order from Strength Worst across the board (except GHG/Climate due to slower economic growth) Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration Regionalized, Reactive environmental policies

Some services improved in three of the four MA scenarios Examples: Freshwater Water regulation Erosion control Water purification Storm protection Aesthetic values Recreation

Degradation of many services can be reversed by 2050 In three of the four MA scenarios, many currently degraded ecosystem services were enhanced by 2050

But the actions needed are significant and not underway Investments in public goods (e.g., education) and poverty reduction Elimination of trade barriers and distorting subsidies Use of active adaptive management Investment in education Investment in new technologies Payments for ecosystem services

Main Findings 1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years. 2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals. 3. Degradation of ecosystems could grow worse but can be reversed. 4. Workable solutions will require significant changes in policy

Promising Options: Change the economic incentives Problem cant be solved so long as ecosystem services are treated as free and limitless Measure ecosystem service values Incorporate into cost-benefit analyses Agricultural and fisheries production subsidies cause ecosystem service degradation. Annual subsidy to agricultural in industrialized countries: $324 billion annually (1/3 of global value) Annual subsidy to fisheries in industrialized countries $6.2 billion (20% of global value) Opportunity to shift subsidies to payments for ecosystem services

Costa Rica Payments for Ecosystem Services Downstream Users benefit from protection of upstream ecosystem services Pay upstream landowners to maintain forest cover on their land $ Program established 1997 By 2001: 280,000 ha enrolled at cost of $30 million Typical payments: $35 to $45 per hectare

Payments for Ecosystem Services Costa Rica Land owners are paid for new plantations, sustainable logging, and forest conservation. Funded in part by tax on energy use. Mexico Pays for forest conservation in critical watersheds using revenue from water charges. Colombia Water users in the Cauca Valley pay for conservation in their watersheds. Ecuador Quito funds from the water utility and the electric power company pay for conservation in the city watershed Promising Options: Change the economic incentives

Market mechanisms may sometimes be useful (e.g. potential to reduce nutrient releases and carbon emissions) Promising Options: Change the economic incentives Rapid growth of Carbon market Ecosystem Marketplace: Online information on ecosystem service markets and payments for services

Development planning and national development strategies could benefit from the incorporation of ecosystem services MDG-Based Poverty Reduction Strategies Capacity building for national planning and assessments Promising Options: Policy, Planning & Management

Promising Options: Technologies Sustainable Agricultural Intensification Energy Technologies Significant harm if global temperature increases 2 o C Billion Hectares Growth in Cropland 1961 to 2004 Photo credit: Jorgen Schytte/Peter Arnold, Inc.

Promising Options: Individual Behavior Public education Information that can influence choices Certification systems Value of ecosystem services Photo credit: W. Reid

Need for deliberative decision-making processes Decision-making could be improved with more information concerning the economic values of different ecosystem services (both marketed and non-marketed) But, not all ecosystem services that matter to people can be valued in economic terms (esp. cultural services and considerations of intrinsic value) Moreover, different stakeholders will place different weights on different attributes of ecosystems Deliberative decision-making processes provide a mechanism to enable these different types of value considerations to be articulated.

Business bottom line 1.Growing Costs and Risks Ecosystem services that are inexpensive or freely available today will cease to be available or become more costly E.g., water, fish, storm protection, local climate, flood control Growing risks associated with ecosystem changes Disease emergence, resource collapse, etc. Businesses cannot assume there will be ample warning of changes in the availability of key ecosystem services Businesses cannot assume their past responses to changes will be successful in the future.

Business bottom line 2.Changes to Framework Conditions Customer preferences Risks of regulatory action Investor pressure Public campaigns Cost of capital Cost of insurance Employee well-being

Business bottom line 3.New Business Opportunities New markets E.g., Carbon market New incentives E.g., payments for ecosystem services New businesses E.g., ecosystem restoration New Technologies

Company Ecosystem Service Audit Undertake an ecosystem service audit What ecosystem services are used or influenced? Evaluate risks to those services Look for cost savings Assess information needs, expertise needed, and management plans Evaluate operating environment Factor into business strategies

Washington Post, March 30, 2005

Findings and data: MAweb.org & Island Press Publications Synthesis Reports Synthesis Board Statement Biodiversity Synthesis Wetlands Synthesis Health Synthesis Desertification Synthesis Business Synthesis Technical Volumes and MA Conceptual Framework (Island Press) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment State and Trends Scenarios Multi-Scale Assessments Responses

Synthesis ReportsBoard Statement MA Conceptual Framework Technical Assessment Volumes

Your Assignment 1)Think about your version of future vision of the earth and your region and tell us what is it. 2)Discuss that your vision is sustainable or not in terms of near (several years) and far (millennium) future.

millennium ecosystem assessment: - overview of findings and millennium development...

Documents