page coastal

8/8/2019 Page Coastal

1/93

P I L O T A N A LY SI S O F G L O B A L E CO S Y ST E M S

CoastalEcosystemsLAURETTA BURKE

YUMIKO KURA

KEN KASSEM

CARMEN REVENGA

MARK SPALDING

DON MCALLISTER


2/93

CAROL ROSENPUBLICATIONS DIRECTOR

HYACINTH BILLINGSPRODUCTION MANAGER

MAGGIE POWELLCOVER DESIGN AND LAYOUT

CAROLLYNE HUTTER EDITING

Copyright 2001 World Resources Institute. All rights reserved.ISBN: 1-56973-458-5Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 2001088657Printed in the United States of America on chlorine-free paper withrecycled content of 50%, 20% of which is post-consumer.

Photo Credits: Cover: Digital Vision, Ltd., Smaller ecosystem photos: Forests: Digital Vision, Ltd.,Agriculture: Viet Nam, IFPRI Photo/P. Berry, Grasslands: PhotoDisc, Freshwat er: Dennis A. Wentz,Coastal: Digit al Vision, Ltd., Extent and Change: Patuxent River, Maryland/ NOAA, ShorelineStabi lizati on: Georgeto w n, Guyana/L. Burke, Water Quality : Noctil uca bloom, Califo rnia/ P.J.S.Franks, Scripps Instit uti on of Oceanography, Biodiversity: Caribbean Sea/NOAA, Mari ne Fisheries:NOAA, Tourism: Bunaken, Nort h Sulawesi, Indonesia/L. Burke.

Each World Resources Institute Report represents a timely, scholarly treat-ment of a subject of public concern. WRI takes responsibility for choosingthe study topics and guaranteeing its authors and researchers freedom of

inquiry. It also solicits and responds to the guidance of advisory panels and expertreviewers. Unless otherwise stated, however, all the interpretation and findings setforth in WRI publications are those of the authors.


3/93


4/93

iv P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F GL O B A L E CO S Y S T E M S

Pilot Analysis of

Global Ecosystems ( PAGE )A series of five technical reports, available in print and on-line athttp://www.wri.org/wr2000.

A GROECOSYSTEM S

Stanley Wood, Kate Sebastian, and Sara J. Scherr,Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Agroecosystems, A joint study by International Food Policy Research Institute and World

Resources Institute, International Food Policy Research Institute and World Resources Institute,Washington D.C.

December 2000 / paperback / ISBN 1-56973-457-7 / US$20.00

COASTA L ECOSYSTEM S

Lauretta Burke, Yumiko Kura, Ken Kassem, Carmen Revenga, Mark Spalding, andDon McAllister, Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Coastal Ecosystems, World ResourcesInstitute, Washington D.C.April 2001 / paperback / ISBN 1-56973-458-5 / US$20.00

FOREST ECOSYSTEM S

Emily Matthews, Richard Payne, Mark Rohweder, and Siobhan Murray,Pilot Analysisof Global Ecosystems: Forest Ecosystems, World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.December 2000 / paperback / ISBN 1-56973-459-3 / US$20.00

FRESHWATER SYSTEM S

Carmen Revenga, Jake Brunner, Norbert Henninger, Ken Kassem, and Richard PaynePilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems: Freshwater Systems, World Resources Institute,Washington D.C.October 2000 / paperback / ISBN 1-56973-460-7 / US$20.00

GRASSLAND ECOSYSTEM S

Robin White, Siobhan Murray, and Mark Rohweder,Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems:Grassland Ecosystems, World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.December 2000 / paperback / ISBN 1-56973-461-5 / US$20.00

The full t ext of each report w ill be available on-line at t he time of publication. Print edcopies may be ordered by mail f rom WRI Publications, P.O. Box 4852, HampdenStation, Baltimore, MD 21211, USA. To order by phone, call 1-800-822-0504 (withinthe Unit ed Stat es) or 410-516-6963 or by fax 410-516-6998. Orders may also beplaced on-line at http://w w w.wristore.com.

The agroecosystem report is also available at ht tp:/ /w w w.ifpri.org. Printed copies maybe ordered by mail from t he Internat ional Food Policy Research Institute, Communica-t ions Service, 2033 K Street , NW, Washingt on, D.C. 20006-5670, USA.

Project Management Norbert Henninger, WRI Walt Reid, WRI

Dan Tunstall, WRI Valerie Thompson, WRI

Arwen Gloege, WRI Elsie Velez-Whited, WRI

Agroecosystems Stanley Wood, International Food

Policy Research InstituteKate Sebastian, International Food

Policy Research InstituteSara J. Scherr, University of

Maryland

Coast al Ecosyst ems Lauretta Burke, WRI

Yumiko Kura, WRI Ken Kassem, WRI Carmen Revenga, WRI

Mark Spalding, UNEP-WCMC Don McAllister, Ocean Voice

International

For est Ecosyst ems Emily Matthews, WRI Richard Payne, WRI Mark Rohweder, WRI Siobhan Murray, WRI

Freshw ater Syst ems Carmen Revenga, WRI

Jake Brunner, WRI Norbert Henninger, WRI Ken Kassem, WRI

Richard Payne, WRI

Grasslan d Ecosyst ems Robin White, WRI Siobhan Murray, WRI

Mark Rohweder, WRI


5/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s v

ContentsFOREWORD .................................................................................................................................................................................................

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................................................................................................

INTRODUCTION TO THE PILOT ANALYSIS OF GLOBAL ECOSYSTEMS ................................................................ Introductio

COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................Scope of the Analysis

Key Findings and Information IssuesConclusions

COASTAL ZONE: EXTENT AND CHANGE............................................................................................................................................Working Definition of Coastal ZoneEstimating Area and Length of Coastal ZoneCharacterizing the Natural Coastal FeaturesExtent and Change in Area of Selected Coastal Ecosystem TypesHuman Modification of Coastal EcosystemsInformation Status and Needs

SHORELINE STABILIZATION ..................................................................................................................................................................

Importance of Shoreline StabilizationEffects of Artificial Structures on the ShorelineCondition of Shoreline Stabil ization ServicesCapacity of Coastal Ecosystems to Continue to Provide Shoreline StabilizationInformation Status and Needs

WATER QUALITY........................................................................................................................................................................................Coastal Water QualityCondition of Coastal WatersCapacity of Coastal Ecosystems to Continue to Provide Clean WaterInformation Status and Needs

BIODIVERSITY............................................................................................................................................................................................Importance of BiodiversityDiversity of Coastal EcosystemsCondition of Coastal and Marine BiodiversityCapacity of Coastal Ecosystems to Sustain BiodiversityInformation Status and Needs


6/93

vi P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F GL O B A L E CO S Y S T E M S

FOOD PRODUCTIONMARINE FISHERIES ......................................................................................................................................Importance of Marine Fisheries ProductionStatus and Trends in Marine Fisheries ProductionPressures on Marine Fishery ResourcesCondition of Marine Fisheries ResourcesCapacity of Coastal and Marine Ecosystems to Continue to Provide FishInformation Status and Needs

TOURISM AND RECREATION .................................................................................................................................................................Growth of Global TourismStatus and Trends of Tourism in the CaribbeanImpacts of Tourism on the Environment and the EconomyTourism Carrying CapacitySustainable TourismThe Role of Protected AreasInformation Status and Needs

TABLESTable 1. Coastal Environments ............................................................................................................................................................ 11Table 2. Coastal Zone Statistics by Country .................................................................................................................................. 1415Table 3. Coastal Characterization Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 16Table 4. Mangrove Area by Country .................................................................................................................................................... 18Table 5. Mangrove Loss for Selected Countries ................................................................................................................................... 19Table 6. Coastal Wetland Extent and Loss for Selected Countries....................................................................................................... 20Table 7. Comparison of Two Coral Reef Area Estimates ...................................................................................................................... 21Table 8. Coastal Population Estimates for 1990 and 1995 .................................................................................................................. 23Table 9. Average Beach Profile Change in Selected Eastern Caribbean Islands ................................................................................. 27Table 10. Number of Known Littoral Species for Selected Species Groups ........................................................................................... 4Table 11. Number of Known Marine Species for Selected Species Groups ........................................................................................... 42Table 12. Threatened Littoral Species ................................................................................................................................................... 44Table 13. Threatened Marine Species ............................................................................................................................................. 4647Table 14. Level of Threats to Coral Reefs Summarized by Region and Country .................................................................................... 4Table 15. Number of Invasive Species in the Mediterranean, Baltic Sea, and Australian Waters .......................................................... 5Table 16. Comparison of Maximum Landings to 1997 Landings by Fishing Area ................................................................................. 5Table 17. State of Exploitation and Discards by Major Fishing Area .................................................................................................... 5Table 18. Trophic Categories ................................................................................................................................................................. 56Table 19. Tourist Arrivals in the Caribbean by Main Markets ............................................................................................................... 64Table 20. Leakages of Gross Tourism Expenditures .............................................................................................................................. 67

FIGURESFigure 1. UNEP Regional Seas ............................................................................................................................................................. 13Figure 2. Natural versus Altered Land Cover Summary........................................................................................................................ 22Figure 3. Number of Oil Spills.............................................................................................................................................................. 34Figure 4. Total Quantity of Oil Spilled .................................................................................................................................................. 35Figure 5. Number of Harmful Algal Bloom Events: 1970s1990s ........................................................................................................ 3Figure 6. Growth in Number of Marine Protected Areas over the Last 100 Years ................................................................................. 4Figure 7. Pelagic and Demersal Fish Catch for the North Atlantic: 19501997................................................................................... 5Figure 8. Commercial Harvest of Important Fish Stocks in the Northwest Atlantic .............................................................................. 5Figure 9. Catches by Trophic Level for the Two Northern Atlantic Fishing Areas in 195054 and 199397 ....................................... 5Figure 10. Piscivore/Zooplanktivore (PS/ZP) Ratio for the Northwest Atlantic ....................................................................................... 5Figure 11. PS/ZP Ratio for the Mediterranean and the Black Sea .......................................................................................................... 59Figure 12. PS/ZP Ratio for the Northwest Pacific ................................................................................................................................... 60Figure 13. Catches by Trophic Level for the Northeast Pacific Fishing Areas in 195054 and 199397 ............................................... 6Figure 14. Travel and Tourism GDP in the Caribbean ............................................................................................................................ 64Figure 15. Travel and Tourism Employment in the Caribbean................................................................................................................ 65Figure 16. Per Capita GDP and Tourism as Percentage of GDP for Selected Countries in the Caribbean .............................................. 6


7/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s vi i

BOXESBox 1. Maritime Areas Definitions ................................................................................................................................................... 12Box 2. Global Distribution of Known Trawling Grounds ................................................................................................................... 2Box 3. Coral Bleaching..................................................................................................................................................................... 47Box 4. Classification of Catch Data into Trophic Categories ............................................................................................................. 56Box 5. Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Coastal Tourism Development in Quintana Roo, Mexico ............................................ 6

MAPSMap 1. Characterization of Natural Coastal FeaturesMap 2. Natural versus Altered Land Cover within 100 km of CoastlineMap 3. Population Distribution within 100 km of CoastlineMap 4. Distribution of Known Trawling GroundsMap 5. Low-lying Areas within 100 km of CoastlineMap 6. Eutrophication-related ParametersMap 7. PCB Concentration in Mussels in the U.S. Coastal Waters: 19861996Map 8. Global Occurrence of Hypoxic ZonesMap 9. Shellfish Bed Closures in the Northeast U.S.: 1995Map 10. Beach Tar Ball Observations in Japan: 19751995Map 11. Global Distribution and Species Richness of Pinnipeds and Marine TurtlesMap 12. Global Distribution of Mangrove Diversity

Map 13. Global Distribution of Coral DiversityMap 14. Distribution of Coral Bleaching Events and Sea Surface Temperature Anomaly Hot Spots, 19971998Map 15. Threatened Marine Important Bird Areas in Middle EastMap 16. Major Observed Threats to Coral ReefsMap 17. Period of Peak Fish Catch and Percent Decline Since the Peak YearMap 18. Piscivore and Zooplanktivore Catch Trend: 195097

REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................................................................................


8/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s ix

food and timber, the study also analyzes the condition of abroad array of ecosystem goods and services that people need,or enjoy, but do not buy in the marketplace.

The five PAGE reports show that human action has pro-foundly changed the extent, condition, and capacity of allmajor ecosystem types. Agriculture has expanded at the ex-pense of grasslands and forests, engineering projects havealtered the hydrological regime of most of the worlds majorrivers, settlement and other forms of development have con-verted habitats around the worlds coastlines. Human activi-ties have adversely altered the earths most important bio-geochemical cycles the water, carbon, and nitrogen cycles on which all life forms depend. Intensive managementregimes and infrastructure development have contributedpositively to providing some goods and services, such as foodand fiber from forest plantations. They have also led to habi-tat fragmentation, pollution, and increased ecosystem vul-nerability to pest attack, fires, and invasion by nonnative spe-

cies. Information is often incomplete and the picture con-fused, but there are many signs that the overall capacity of ecosystems to continue to produce many of the goods andservices on which we depend is declining.

The results of the PAGE are summarized inWorld Resources20002001, a biennial report on the global environment pub-lished by the World Resources Institute in partnership withthe United Nations Development Programme, the United Na-tions Environment Programme, and the World Bank. Theseinstitutions have affirmed their commitment to making theviability of the worlds ecosystems a critical development pri-ority for the 21st century. WRI and its partners began work

with a conviction that the challenge of managing earths eco-systems and the consequences of failure will increasesignificantly in coming decades. We end with a keen aware-ness that the scientific knowledge and political will requiredto meet this challenge are often lacking today. To make soundecosystem management decisions in the future, significantchanges are needed in the way we use the knowledge andexperience at hand, as well as the range of information broughtto bear on resource management decisions.

Earths ecosystems and its peoples are bound together in agrand and complex symbiosis. We depend on ecosystems tosustain us, but the continued health of ecosystems depends,in turn, on our use and care. Ecosystems are the productiveengines of the planet, providing us with everything from thewater we drink to the food we eat and the fiber we use forclothing, paper, or lumber. Yet, nearly every measure we useto assess the health of ecosystems tells us we are drawing onthem more than ever and degrading them, in some cases atan accelerating pace.

Our knowledge of ecosystems has increased dramaticallyin recent decades, but it has not kept pace with our ability toalter them. Economic development and human well-being willdepend in large part on our ability to manage ecosystemsmore sustainably. We must learn to evaluate our decisions onland and resource use in terms of how they affect the capac-ity of ecosystems to sustain life not only human life, butalso the health and productive potential of plants, animals,

and natural systems.A critical step in improving the way we manage the earthsecosystems is to take stock of their extent, their condition,and their capacity to provide the goods and services we willneed in years to come. To date, no such comprehensive as-sessment of the state of the worlds ecosystems has been un-dertaken.

The Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE) beginsto address this gap. This study is the result of a remarkablecollaborative effort between the World Resources Institute(WRI), the International Food Policy Research Institute(IFPRI), intergovernmental organizations, agencies, research

institutes, and individual experts in more than 25 countriesworldwide. The PAGE compares information already avail-able on a global scale about the condition of five major classesof ecosystems: agroecosystems, coastal areas, forests, fresh-water systems, and grasslands. IFPRI led the agroecosystemanalysis, while the others were led by WRI. The pilot analy-sis examines not only the quantity and quality of outputs butalso the biological basis for production, including soil andwater condition, biodiversity, and changes in land use overtime. Rather than looking just at marketed products, such as

Forew ord


9/93

x P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F G L O B A L EC O S Y S T EM S

A truly comprehensive and integrated assessment of glo-bal ecosystems that goes well beyond our pilot analysis isnecessary to meet information needs and to catalyze regionaland local assessments. Planning for such a Millennium Eco-system Assessment is already under way. In 1998, represen-tatives from international scientific and political bodies be-gan to explore the merits of, and recommend the structurefor, such an assessment. After consulting for a year and con-sidering the preliminary findings of the PAGE report, theyconcluded that an international scientific assessment of thepresent and likely future condition of the worlds ecosystemswas both feasible and urgently needed. They urged local,national, and international inst itutions to support the effortas stakeholders, users, and sources of expertise. If concludedsuccessfully, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment will gen-erate new information, integrate current knowledge, developmethodological tools, and increase public understanding.

Human dominance of the earths productive systems givesus enormous responsibilities, but great opportunities as well.The challenge for the 21st century is to understand the vul-nerabilities and resilience of ecosystems, so that we can find

ways to reconcile the demands of human development withthe tolerances of nature.

We deeply appreciate support for this project from theAustralian Centre for International Agricultural Research,The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, The NetherlandsMinistry of Foreign Affairs, the Swedish International Devel-opment Cooperation Agency, the United Nations Develop-ment Programme, the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme, the Global Bureau of the United States Agencyfor International Development, and The World Bank.

A special thank you goes to the AVINA Foundation, theGlobal Environment Facility, and the United Nations Fundfor International Partnerships for their early support of PAGEand the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, which was in-strumental in launching our efforts.

JONATHAN LASHPresidentWorld Resources Institute


10/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s xi

Acknow ledgments

The World Resources Institute and the International FoodPolicy Research Institute would like to acknowledge the mem-bers of the Millennium Assessment Steering Committee, whogenerously gave their time, insights, and expert review com-ments in support of the Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems.

Edward Ayensu, Ghana; Mark Collins, United NationsEnvironment Programme - World Conservation MonitoringCentre (UNEP-WCMC), United Kingdom; Angela Cropper,Trinidad and Tobago; Andrew Dearing, World Business Coun-cil for Sustainable Development (WBCSD); Janos Pasztor,UNFCCC; Louise Fresco, FAO; Madhav Gadgil, Indian In-stitute of Science, Bangalore, India; Habiba Gitay, Austra-lian National University, Australia; Gisbert Glaser, UNESCO;Zuzana Guziova, Ministry of the Environment, Slovak Re-public; He Changchui , FAO; Calestous Juma, Harvard Uni-versity; John Krebs, National Environment Research Coun-cil, United Kingdom; Jonathan Lash, World Resources Insti-tute; Roberto Lenton, UNDP; Jane Lubchenco, Oregon State

University; Jeffrey McNeely, World Conservation Union(IUCN), Switzerland; Harold Mooney, International Councilof Scientific Unions; Ndegwa Ndiangui, Convention to Com-bat Desertification; Prabhu L. Pingali, CIMMYT; Per Pinstrup-Andersen, Consultative Group on International AgriculturalResearch; Mario Ramos, Global Environment Facility; PeterRaven, Missouri Botanical Garden; Walter Reid, Secretariat;Cristian Samper, Instituto Alexander Von Humboldt, Colom-bia; Jos Sarukhn, CONABIO, Mexico; Peter Schei, Direc-torate for Nature Management, Norway; Klaus Tpfer, UNEP;Jos Galzia Tundisi, International Institute of Ecology, Bra-zil; Robert Watson, World Bank; Xu Guanhua, Ministry of

Science and Technology, Peoples Republic of China; A.H.Zakri, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia.

The Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems would not havebeen possible without the data provided by numerous insti-tutions and agencies.

The authors of the coastal ecosystem analysis wish to ex-press their gratitude for the generous cooperation and invalu-able information we received from the following organizations:

Caribbean Association for Sustainable Tourism; CaribbeanTourism Organization; Center for International Earth Science

Information Network (CIESIN); Coastal Resources Center,University of Rhode Island; Fisheries Department, Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); Inter-national Tanker Owners Pollution Federation; Island Re-sources Foundation, Virgin Islands; Japan OceanographicData Center; National Ocean Service, National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA); Ocean Voice Interna-tional, Ottawa, Canada; UNEP/Global Resource InformationDatabase, Nairobi, Kenya; Veridian-MRJ Technology Solu-tions, Virginia, U.S.A.; UNEP-World Conservation Monitor-ing Centre (UNEP-WCMC); World Travel and Tourism Coun-cil.

The authors would also like to express their gratitude tothe many individuals who contributed data and advice, at-tended expert workshops, and reviewed successive drafts of this report.

Tundi Agardy, Conservation International; Salvatore Arico,Division of Ecological Sciences, UNESCO; Jaime Baquero,

Gary Spiller, and Robert Cambell, Ocean Voice International;Barbara Best, USAID; Simon Blyth, Lucy Conway, Neil Cox,Ed Green, Brian Groombridge, Chantal Hagen, JoannaHugues, and Corinna Ravillious, UNEP-WCMC; CharlesEhler, Suzanne Bricker, Paul Orlando, Tom OConnor, DanBasta, Al Strong, Jim Hendee, and Ingrid Guch, NOAA; JohnCaddy, Luca Garibaldi, Richard Grainger, Serge Garcia, andDavid James, Fisheries Department, FAO; Gillian Cambers,Coast and Beach Stability in the Lesser Antilles Project; SteveColwell and Shawn Reifsteck, Coral Reef Alliance; Ned Cyr,Global Ocean Observing System, UNESCO; Charlotte DeFontaubert, IUCN; Uwe Deichmann, World Bank; Robert

Diaz, Virginia Institute of Marine Science; Paul Epstein,Harvard Medical School; Jonathan Garber, US Environmen-tal Protection Agency; Lynne Hale, James Tobey, PamRubinoff, and Maria Haws, Coastal Resources Center, Uni-versity of Rhode Island; Giovanni Battista La Monica, De-partment of Land Science, University of Rome; JohnMcManus, International Center for Living Aquatic ResourcesManagement; Bruce Potter, Island Resources Foundation;Lorin Pruett, Hal Palmer, and Joe Cimino, Veridian-MRJ Tech-


11/93

xi i P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F G L O B A L EC O S Y S T EM S

nology Solutions; Kelly Robinson, Caribbean Association forSustainable Tourism; Charles Sheppard, University of Warwick; Ben Sherman, University of New Hampshire;Mercedes Silva, Caribbean Tourism Organization; Matt Stutz,Division of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Duke University; SylviaTognetti, University of Maryland.

We also wish to thank the many individuals at WRI whowere generous with their time and comments as this report

progressed: Dan Tunstall, Norbert Henninger, EmilyMatthews, Siobhan Murray, Gregory Mock, Jake Brunner, andTony Janetos. Johnathan Kool and Armin Jess were extremelyhelpful in producing final maps and figures. A special thankyou goes to Hyacinth Billings, Kathy Doucette, Maggie Powell,and Carollyne Hutter for their editorial and design guidancethrough the production of the report.


12/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s I n t r o d u c t i o n / 1

I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e P A G E

Introduction to the Pilot Analys

Global Ecosystems

may not know of each others relevantfindings.

OBJECTIVES

The Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems(PAGE) is the first attempt to synthesize

information from national, regional, andglobal assessments. Information sourcesinclude state of the environment re-ports; sectoral assessments of agricul-ture, forestry, biodiversity, water, andfisheries, as well as national and glo-bal assessments of ecosystem extentand change; scientific research articles;and various national and internationaldata sets. The study reports on five major categories of ecosystems: Agroecosystems; Coastal ecosystems; Forest ecosystems; Freshwater systems; Grassland ecosystems.

These ecosystems account for about90 percent of the earths land surface,excluding Greenland and Antarctica.PAGE results are being published as aseries of five technical reports, each cov-ering one ecosystem. Electronic versionsof the reports are posted on the Websiteof the World Resources Institute [http:/ /www.wri.org/wr2000] and theagroecosystems report also is availableon the Website of the International FoodPolicy Research Institute [http://www/ ifpri.org].

The primary objective of the pilotanalysis is to provide an overview of eco-system condition at the global and con-tinental levels. The analysis documents

the extent and distribution of the fivemajor ecosystem types and identifiesecosystem change over time. It analyzesthe quantity and quality of ecosystemgoods and services and, where dataexist, reviews trends relevant to the pro-

duction of these goods and services overthe past 30 to 40 years. Finally, PAGEattempts to assess the capacity of eco-systems to continue to provide goodsand services, using measures of biologi-cal productivity, including soil andwater conditions, biodiversity, and landuse. Wherever possible, information ispresented in the form of indicators andmaps.

A second objective of PAGE is toidentify the most serious informationgaps that limit our current understand-ing of ecosystem condition. The infor-mation base necessary to assess ecosys-tem condition and productive capacityhas not improved in recent years, andmay even be shrinking as funding forenvironmental monitoring and record-keeping diminishes in some regions.

Most importantly, PAGE supports thelaunch of a Millennium Ecosystem As-sessment, a more ambitious, detailed,and integrated assessment of global eco-systems that will provide a firmer basisfor policy- and decision-making at thenational and subnational scale.

AN INTEGRA TED A PPROACH TOA SSESSING ECOSYSTEM GOODSA ND SERVICES

Ecosystems provide humans with awealth of goods and services, including

PEOPLE AN D ECOSYSTEM S

The worlds economies are based on thegoods and services derived from ecosys-tems. Human life itself depends on thecontinuing capacity of biological pro-cesses to provide their multitude of ben-

efits. Yet, for too long in both rich andpoor countries, development prioritieshave focused on how much humanitycan take from ecosystems, and too littleattention has been paid to the impact of our actions. We are now experiencingthe effects of ecosystem decline in nu-merous ways: water shortages in thePunjab, India; soil erosion in Tuva, Rus-sia; fish kills off the coast of North Caro-lina in the United States; landslides onthe deforested slopes of Honduras; firesin the forests of Borneo and Sumatra inIndonesia. The poor, who often dependdirectly on ecosystems for their liveli-hoods, suffer most when ecosystems aredegraded.

A critical step in managing our eco-systems is to take stock of their extent,their condition, and their capacity tocontinue to provide what we need. Al-though the information available todayis more comprehensive than at any timepreviously, it does not provide a com-plete picture of the state of the worldsecosystems and falls far short of man-agement and policy needs. Informationis being collected in abundance butefforts are often poorly coordinated.Scales are noncomparable, baselinedata are lacking, time series are incom-plete, differing measures defy integra-tion, and different information sources


13/93

I n t r o d u c t i o n / 2 P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F G L O B A L EC O S Y S T EM S


food, building and clothing materials,medicines, climate regulation, water pu-rification, nutrient cycling, recreationopportunities, and amenity value. At

present, we tend to manage ecosystemsfor one dominant good or service, suchas grain, fish, timber, or hydropower,without fully realizing the trade-offs weare making. In so doing, we may be sac-rificing goods or services more valuablethan those we receive often thosegoods and services that are not yet val-ued in the market, such as biodiversityand flood control. An integrated ecosys-tem approach considers the entire rangeof possible goods and services a givenecosystem provides and attempts to op-timize the benefits that society can de-rive from that ecosystem and across eco-systems. Its purpose is to help maketrade-offs efficient, transparent, and sus-tainable.

Such an approach, however, presentssignificant methodological challenges.Unlike a living organism, which mightbe either healthy or unhealthy but can-not be both simultaneously, ecosystemscan be in good condition for producingcertain goods and services but in poorcondition for others. PAGE attempts toevaluate the condition of ecosystems byassessing separately their capacity toprovide a variety of goods and servicesand examining the trade-offs humanshave made among those goods and ser-vices. As one example, analysis of aparticular region might reveal that foodproduction is high but, because of irri-gation and heavy fertilizer application,

the ability of the system to provide cleanwater has been diminished.Given data inadequacies, this sys-

tematic approach was not always fea-sible. For each of the five ecosystems,PAGE researchers, therefore, focus ondocumenting the extent and distributionof ecosystems and changes over time.We develop indicators of ecosystem con-dition indicators that inform us about

the current provision of goods and ser-vices and the l ikely capacity of the eco-system to continue providing thosegoods and services. Goods and services

are selected on the basis of their per-ceived importance to human develop-ment. Most of the ecosystem studies ex-amine food production, water qualityand quantity, biodiversity, and carbonsequestration. The analysis of forestsalso studies timber and woodfuel pro-duction; coastal and grassland studiesexamine recreational and tourism ser-vices; and the agroecosystem study re-views the soil resource as an indicatorof both agricultural potential and its cur-rent condition.

PARTN ERS A ND THE RESEARCHPROCESS

The Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosys-tems was a truly international collabo-rative effort. The World Resources In-stitute and the International FoodPolicy Research Institute carried outtheir research in partnership with nu-merous institutions worldwide (see Ac-knowledgments ). In addition to thesepartnerships, PAGE researchers reliedon a network of international expertsfor ideas, comments, and formal re-views. The research process includedmeetings in Washington, D.C., attendedby more than 50 experts from devel-oped and developing countries. Themeetings proved invaluable in devel-oping the conceptual approach andguiding the research program towardthe most promising indicators given

time, budget, and data constraints.Drafts of PAGE reports were sent to over70 experts worldwide, presented andcritiqued at a technical meeting of theConvention on Biological Diversity inMontreal (June, 1999) and discussedat a Millennium Assessment planningmeeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia(September, 1999). Draft PAGE mate-rials and indicators were also presented

and discussed at a Millennium Assess-ment planning meeting in Winnipeg,Canada, (September, 1999) and at themeeting of the Parties to the Conven-

tion to Combat Desertification, held inRecife, Brazil (November, 1999).

KEY FINDINGS

Key findings of PAGE relate both to eco-system condition and the informationbase that supported our conclusions.

T h e C u r r e n t S t a t e o fE c o s y s t e m sThe PAGE reports show that human ac-tion has profoundly changed the extent,distribution, and condition of all majorecosystem types. Agriculture has ex-panded at the expense of grasslands andforests, engineering projects have al-tered the hydrological regime of most of the worlds major rivers, settlement andother forms of development have con-verted habitats around the worlds coast-lines.

The picture we get from PAGE re-sults is complex. Ecosystems are in goodcondition for producing some goods andservices but in poor condition for pro-ducing others. Overall, however, thereare many signs that the capacity of eco-systems to continue to produce many of the goods and services on which we de-pend is declining. Human activitieshave significantly disturbed the globalwater, carbon, and nitrogen cycles onwhich all life depends. Agriculture, in-dustry, and the spread of human settle-

ments have permanently converted ex-tensive areas of natural habitat and con-tributed to ecosystem degradationthrough fragmentation, pollution, andincreased incidence of pest attacks,fires, and invasion by nonnative species.

The following paragraphs look acrossecosystems to summarize trends in pro-duction of the most important goods and


14/93



services and the outlook for ecosystemproductivity in the future.

Food Producti on

Food production has more than keptpace with global population growth. Onaverage, food supplies are 24 percenthigher per person than in 1961 and realprices are 40 percent lower. Productionis likely to continue to rise as demandincreases in the short to medium term.Long-term productivity, however, isthreatened by increasing water scarcityand soil degradation, which is now se-vere enough to reduce yields on about16 percent of agricultural land, espe-cially cropland in Africa and CentralAmerica and pastures in Africa. Irri-gated agriculture, an important compo-nent in the productivity gains of theGreen Revolution, has contributed towaterlogging and salinization, as well asto the depletion and chemical contami-nation of surface and groundwater sup-plies. Widespread use of pesticides oncrops has lead to the emergence of manypesticide-resistant pests and pathogens,and intensive livestock production hascreated problems of manure disposaland water pollution. Food productionfrom marine fisheries has risen sixfoldsince 1950 but the rate of increase hasslowed dramatically as fisheries havebeen overexploited. More than 70 per-cent of the worlds fishery resources forwhich there is information are now fullyfished or overfished (yields are static ordeclining). Coastal fisheries are underthreat from pollution, development, and

degradation of coral reef and mangrovehabitats. Future increases in productionare expected to come largely fromaquaculture.

Water Quantity Dams, diversions, and other engineer-ing works have transformed the quan-tity and location of freshwater availablefor human use and sustaining aquatic

ecosystems. Water engineering has pro-foundly improved living standards, byproviding fresh drinking water, water forirrigation, energy, transport, and flood

control. In the twentieth century, waterwithdrawals have risen at more thandouble the rate of population increaseand surface and groundwater sources inmany parts of Asia, North Africa, andNorth America are being depleted.About 70 percent of water is used in ir-rigation systems where efficiency is of-ten so low that, on average, less than half the water withdrawn reaches crops. Onalmost every continent, river modifica-tion has affected the flow of rivers to thepoint where some no longer reach theocean during the dry season. Freshwa-ter wetlands, which store water, reduceflooding, and provide specializedbiodiversity habitat, have been reducedby as much as 50 percent worldwide.Currently, almost 40 percent of theworlds population experience seriouswater shortages. Water scarcity is ex-pected to grow dramatically in some re-gions as competition for water grows be-tween agricultural, urban, and commer-cial sectors.

Water Quality Surface water quality has improved withrespect to some pollutants in developedcountries but water quality in develop-ing countries, especially near urban andindustrial areas, has worsened. Water isdegraded directly by chemical or nutri-ent pollution, and indirectly when landuse change increases soil erosion or re-

duces the capacity of ecosystems to fil-ter water. Nutrient runoff from agricul-ture is a serious problem around theworld, resulting in eutrophication andhuman health hazards in coastal regions,especially in the Mediterranean, BlackSea, and northwestern Gulf of Mexico.Water-borne diseases caused by fecalcontamination of water by untreatedsewage are a major source of morbidity

and mortality in the developing world.Pollution and the introduction of non-native species to freshwater ecosystemshave contributed to serious declines in

freshwater biodiversity.

Carbon Storage The worlds plants and soil organismsabsorb carbon dioxide (CO2) during pho-tosynthesis and store it in their t issues,which helps to slow the accumulationof CO2 in the atmosphere and mitigateclimate change. Land use change thathas increased production of food andother commodities has reduced the netcapacity of ecosystems to sequester andstore carbon. Carbon-rich grasslandsand forests in the temperate zone havebeen extensively converted to croplandand pasture, which store less carbon perunit area of land. Deforestation is itself a significant source of carbon emissions,because carbon stored in plant tissue isreleased by burning and accelerated de-composition. Forests currently storeabout 40 percent of all the carbon heldin terrestrial ecosystems. Forests in thenorthern hemisphere are slowly increas-ing their storage capacity as they regrowafter historic clearance. This gain, how-ever, is more than offset by deforesta-tion in the tropics. Land use change ac-counts for about 20 percent of anthro-pogenic carbon emissions to the atmo-sphere. Globally, forests today are a netsource of carbon.

Biodiversity Biodiversity provides many direct ben-

efits to humans: genetic material for cropand livestock breeding, chemicals formedicines, and raw materials for indus-try. Diversity of living organisms and theabundance of populations of many spe-cies are also critical to maintaining bio-logical services, such as pollination andnutrient cycling. Less tangibly, but noless importantly, diversity in nature isregarded by most people as valuable in


15/93

I n t r o d u c t i o n / 4 P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F G L O B A L EC O S Y S T EM S


its own right, a source of aesthetic plea-sure, spiritual solace, beauty, and won-der. Alarming losses in globalbiodiversity have occurred over the past

century. Most are the result of habitatdestruction. Forests, grasslands, wet-lands, and mangroves have been exten-sively converted to other uses; only tun-dra, the Poles, and deep-sea ecosystemshave experienced relatively littlechange. Biodiversity has suffered asagricultural land, which supports far lessbiodiversity than natural forest, has ex-panded primarily at the expense of for-est areas. Biodiversity is also diminishedby intensification, which reduces thearea allotted to hedgerows, copses, orwildlife corridors and displaces tradi-tional varieties of seeds with modernhigh-yielding, but genetically uniform,crops. Pollution, overexploitation, andcompetition from invasive species rep-resent further threats to biodiversity.Freshwater ecosystems appear to be themost severely degraded overall, with anestimated 20 percent of freshwater fishspecies becoming extinct, threatened, orendangered in recent decades.

I n f o r m a t i o n St a t u sa n d N e e d s

Ecosystem Extent and Land Use Characterization Available data proved adequate to mapapproximate ecosystem extent for mostregions and to estimate historic changein grassland and forest area by compar-ing current with potential vegetation

cover. PAGE was able to report only onrecent changes in ecosystem extent atthe global level for forests and agricul-tural land.

PAGE provides an overview of hu-man modifications to ecosystemsthrough conversion, cultivation,firesetting, fragmentation by roads anddams, and trawling of continentalshelves. The study develops a number

of indicators that quantify the degree of human modification but more informa-tion is needed to document adequatelythe nature and rate of human modifica-

tions to ecosystems. Relevant data at theglobal level are incomplete and someexisting data sets are out of date.

Perhaps the most urgent need is forbetter information on the spatial distri-bution of ecosystems and land uses. Re-mote sensing has greatly enhanced ourknowledge of the global extent of veg-etation types. Satellite data can provideinvaluable information on the spatialpattern and extent of ecosystems, ontheir physical structure and attributes,and on rates of change in the landscape.However, while gross spatial changes invegetation extent can be monitored us-ing coarse-resolution satellite data,quantifying land cover change at thenational or subnational level requireshigh-resolution data with a resolution of tens of meters rather than kilometers.

Much of the information that wouldallow these needs to be met, at both thenational and global levels, already ex-ists, but is not yet in the public domain.New remote sensing techniques and im-proved capabilities to manage complexglobal data sets mean that a completesatellite-based global picture of theearth could now be made available, al-though at significant cost. This informa-tion would need to be supplemented byextensive ground-truthing, involving ad-ditional costs. If sufficient resourceswere committed, fundamentally impor-tant information on ecosystem extent,

land cover, and land use patterns aroundthe world could be provided at the levelof detail needed for national planning.Such information would also prove in-valuable to international environmentalconventions, such as those dealing withwetlands, biological diversity, desertifi-cation, and climate change, as well asthe international agriculture, forest, andfishery research community.

Ecosystem Condit ion and Capacity t o Provide Goods and Servi ces In contrast to information on spatial ex-tent, data that can be used to analyze

ecosystem condition are often unavail-able or incomplete. Indicator develop-ment is also beset by methodological dif-ficulties. Traditional indicators, for ex-ample, those relating to pressures on en-vironments, environmental status, or so-cietal responses (pressure-state-re-sponse model indicators) provide onlya partial view and reveal little about theunderlying capacity of the ecosystem todeliver desired goods and services.Equally, indicators of human modifica-tion tell us about changes in land use orbiological parameters, but do not nec-essarily inform us about potentially posi-tive or negative outcomes.

Ecosystem conditions tend to behighly site-specific. Information on ratesof soil erosion or species diversity in onearea may have little relevance to an ap-parently similar system a few miles away.It is expensive and challenging to moni-tor and synthesize site-specific data andpresent it in a form suitable for nationalpolicy and resource management deci-sions. Finally, even where data are avail-able, scientific understanding of howchanges in biological systems will affectgoods and services is limited. For ex-ample, experimental evidence showsthat loss of biological diversity tends toreduce the resilience of a system to per-turbations, such as storms, pest out-breaks, or climate change. But scien-tists are not yet able to quantify how

much resilience is lost as a result of theloss of biodiversity in a particular si teor how that loss of resilience might af-fect the long-term provision of goods andservices.

Overall, the availabil ity and qualityof information tend to match the recog-nition accorded to various goods and ser-vices by markets. Generally good dataare available for traded goods, such as


16/93



grains, fish, meat, and timber productsand some of the more basic relevant pro-ductivity factors, such as fertilizer ap-plication rates, water inputs, and yields.

Data on products that are exchanged ininformal markets, or consumed directly,are patchy and often modeled. Examplesinclude fish landings from artisanal fish-eries, woodfuels, subsistence food cropsand livestock, and nonwood forest prod-ucts. Information on the biological fac-tors that support production of thesegoods including size of fish spawn-ing stocks, biomass densities, subsis-tence food yields, and forest food har-vests are generally absent.

The future capacity (long-term pro-ductivity) of ecosystems is influenced bybiological processes, such as soil forma-tion, nutrient cycling, pollination, andwater purification and cycling. Few of these environmental services have, asyet, been accorded economic value thatis recognized in any functioning market.There is a corresponding lack of sup-port for data collection and monitoring.This is changing in the case of carbonstorage and cycling. Interest in the pos-sibilities of carbon trading mechanismshas stimulated research and generatedmuch improved data on carbon storesin terrestrial ecosystems and the dimen-sions of the global carbon cycle. Fewcomparable data sets exist for elementssuch as nitrogen or sulfur, despite their

fundamental importance in maintainingliving systems.

Although the economic value of ge-netic diversity is growing, information

on biodiversity is uniformly poor.Baseline and trend data are largely lack-ing; only an estimated 15 to 20 percentof the worlds species have been identi-fied. The OECD Megascience Forumhas launched a new international pro-gram to accelerate the identification andcataloging of species around the world.This information will need to be supple-mented with improved data on speciespopulation trends and the numbers andabundance of invasive species. Devel-oping databases on population trends (andthreat status) is likely to be a major chal-lenge, because most countries still needto establish basic monitoring programs.

The PAGE divides the worlds eco-systems to examine them at a globalscale and think in broad terms about thechallenges of managing themsustainably. In reality, ecosystems arelinked by countless flows of material andhuman actions. The PAGE analysis doesnot make a distinction between naturaland managed ecosystems; human inter-vention affects all ecosystems to somedegree. Our aim is to take a first steptoward understanding the collective im-pacts of those interventions on the fullrange of goods and services that ecosys-tems provide. We conclude that we lack

much of the baseline information nec-essary to determine ecosystem condi-tions at a global, regional or, in manyinstances, even a local scale. We also

lack systematic approaches necessary tointegrate analyses undertaken at differ-ent locations and spatial scales.

Finally, it should be noted that PAGElooks at past trends and current status,but does not try to project future situa-tions where, for example, technologicaldevelopment might increase dramati-cally the capacity of ecosystems to de-liver the goods and services we need.Such considerations were beyond thescope of the study. However, technolo-gies tend to be developed and appliedin response to market-related opportu-nities. A significant challenge is to findthose technologies, such as integratedpest management and zero tillage culti-vation practices in the case of agricul-ture, that can simultaneously offer mar-ket-related as well as environmentalbenefits. It has to be recognized, none-theless, that this type of win-win so-lution may not always be possible. Insuch cases, we need to understand thenature of the trade-offs we must makewhen choosing among different combi-nations of goods and services. At presentour knowledge is often insufficient to tellus where and when those trade-offs areoccurring and how we might minimizetheir effects.


17/93

C o a st a l E co s y s t e m s 1

E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y

Coastal ecosystems, found along continental margins, are re-gions of remarkable biological productivity and high accessi-bility. This has made them centers of human activity for millen-nia. Coastal ecosystems provide a wide array of goods and ser-vices: they host the worlds primary ports of commerce; they arethe primary producers of fish, shellfish, and seaweed for bothhuman and animal consumption; and they are also a consider-able source of fertilizer, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, householdproducts, and construction materials.

Encompassing a broad range of habitat types and harboringa wealth of species and genetic diversity, coastal ecosystemsstore and cycle nutrients, filter pollutants from inland freshwa-ter systems, and help to protect shorelines from erosion andstorms. On the other side of shorelines, oceans play a vital rolein regulating global hydrology and climate and they are a majorcarbon sink and oxygen source because of the high productiv-ity of phytoplankton. The beauty of coastal ecosystems makesthem a magnet for the worlds population. People gravitate tocoastal regions to live as well as for leisure, recreational activi-ties, and tourism.

For purposes of this analysis, the coastal zone has been de-fined to include the intertidal and subtidal areas on and abovethe continental shelf (to a depth of 200 meters) and immedi-ately adjacent lands. This definition therefore includes areasthat are routinely inundated by saltwater. Because the defini-tion of coastal ecosystems is based on their physical character-istics (their proximity to the coast) rather than a distinct set of

biological features, they encompass a much more diverse arrayof habitats than do the other ecosystems in the Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE), such as grasslands or forests. Coralreefs, mangroves, tidal wetlands, seagrass beds, barrier islands,estuaries, peat swamps, and a variety of other habitats eachprovides its own distinct bundle of goods and services and facessomewhat different pressures.

S c o p e o f t h e A n a l y s i s

This study analyzes quantitative and qualitative information anddevelops selected indicators on the condition of the worldscoastal zone, where condition is defined as the current and fu-ture capacity of coastal ecosystems to provide the full range of goods and services needed or valued by humans.

In addition to assessing the condition of the different coastalhabitats, with the exception of continental slope and deep-seahabitats, the PAGE analysis also includes marine fisheries. Thebulk of the worlds marine fish harvestas much as 95 per-cent, by some estimatesis caught or reared in coastal waters(Sherman 1993:3). Only a small percentage comes from the openocean.

This study relied on global and regional data sets providedby many organizations, including the United Nations Environ-ment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre(UNEP-WCMC), the Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations (FAO), the World Wildlife Fund-US (WWF),IUCN- The World Conservation Union, and others. These glo-bal and regional data sets generally focus on a single issue ordistinct habitat type, and rarely cover the entire coastal ecosys-tem. The PAGE analysis also benefited from a variety of na-tional assessments and reviews that provide a wealth of infor-mation for certain countries, particularly the United States,Australia, and parts of Europe. These reviews attempt to inte-grate and summarize the best available information to develop

a comprehensive picture of the status of coastal ecosystems.Most of these efforts, however, remain hampered by the limitedavailability and inconsistencies of the data, and therefore relyheavily upon expert opinion. In addition to these global, re-gional and national data sets, the PAGE analysis also used casestudies from around the world to illustrate important issues,concepts, and trends in the coastal zone.

COASTAL E COSYSTEMS:EXECUTIVE SUMMAR Y


18/93

2 P I L O T A N A LY S I S O F G L O B A L E C O S Y S TE M S


Because of the lack of global data on coastal habitats, a largepart of the efforts in this analysis went into identifying data andinformation gaps, as well as developing useful, but often proxy,indicators to assess the condition of goods and services derivedfrom coastal ecosystems. Throughout the study the emphasiswas placed on quantitative and geographically referenced in-formation.

As mentioned earlier, the coastal zone provides goods andservices of immeasurable value to human society. The goodsfrom marine and coastal habitats include food for humans andanimals (including fish, shellfish, krill, and seaweed); salt; min-erals and oil resources; construction materials (sand, rock, coral,lime, and wood); and biodiversity, including the genetic stockthat has potential for various biotechnology and medicinal ap-plications. The services provided by coastal ecosystems are lessreadily quantified in absolute terms, but are also invaluable tohuman society and to life on earth. These include shorelineprotection (buffering the coastline, protecting it from storms anderosion from wind and waves), storing and cycling nutrients,sustaining biodiversity, maintaining water quality (through fil-tering and degrading pollutants), and serving as areas for recre-ation and tourism.

This analysis only considers a subset of goods and servicesderived from coastal ecosystems. The five categories consid-ered are: Shoreline stabilization; Water quality; Biodiversity; Food production marine fisheries; and Tourism and recreation.

Other more limited services such as marine transport, in-cluding port facilities and channel dredging, are not consid-ered even though marine transport has shaped the developmentof human history and remains of critical importance today. Like-wise, extractive activities, such as the mining of minerals orextraction of oil and construction materials, are not covered.

This study also excludes discussion of the global climateand hydrologic functions of the oceans. Examining these ser-vices would be more appropriate in an assessment of the entiremarine environment. Activities in the coastal zone only play asmall role in the overall volume, carbon storage, and heat stor-age capacity of oceans. As such, the topic of oceans as climateregulators is beyond the scope of this report.

K e y Fi n d i n g s a n d I n f o r m a t i o n I ss u e sThe following tables summarize the studys key findings regard-ing the condition of coastal ecosystems and marine fisheries, aswell as the quality and availabili ty of the data.


19/93



Coastal Zone: Extent and ChangePAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS

DATA S OURCESAND C OMMENTS

Coastal zone extent Pruett and Cimino 2000, unpublished data. Estimates of coastline length by country calculated from aglobally consistent data set (World Vector Shoreline) at a uniform scale of 1:250,000. Other estimatescalculated from Global Maritime Boundaries Database (Veridian-MRJ Technology Solutions, 2000).

Characterization of naturalfeatures

UNEP-WCMC 1999a and 1999b (coral reefs and mangroves); UNEP-WCMC 1998 (wetlands); NSIDC1999 (sea ice); LOICZ 1998 (coastal geomorphology); ESRI 1992 and 1993 (river locations); IOC et al.1997 (coastline location); Stutz et al. 1999; and Stutz 1999, unpublished data (barrier island locations).The typology represents a hierarchical summary of coastal features relevant to the goods and servicesdiscussed in this report. Scale and quality of input data vary. This analysis does not directly addressclimate, currents, or substrate.

Extent of natural habitats Spalding et al. 1997 (mangroves); Spalding and Grenfell 1997 (coral reefs); UNEP-WCMC 1998(wetlands); Even though these data sets are incomplete and of varying quality, they provide an indicationof the extent of these habitat types around the world.

Loss of natural habitats Mangrove and coastal wetland loss statistics by country, compiled from multiple sources. The inconsistenthabitat classification schemes and the different time periods covered make assessing change difficult.

Natural versus altered landcover within 100 km of coastline

GLCCD 1998. Summary of International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme land cover classes for landareas within 100 km of coastline. The coarse resolution (1km) and the classification scheme whichfocuses on terrestrial systems does not adequately capture the complexity of the coastal zone, butprovides an indicator of the modification of coastal habitats.

Human population within 100km of coastline

CIESEN et al. 2000. The original data sources are national population censuses by administrativedistrict. Year of census and resolution vary. Estimates are standardized for 1990 and 1995.

Disturbance to benthiccommunitydistribution of trawling grounds

Partial global summary of trawling grounds in 24 countries by McAllister et al. (1999) executed for thisstudy. Does not show the intensity of trawling within each area.

C ONDITIONS AND TRENDS INFORMATION S TATUS AND NEEDS

In 1995, over 2.2 billion people 39 percent of the world'spopulation lived within 100 km of a coast, an increase from 2 billionpeople in 1990. The coastal area accounts for only 20 percent of allland area.

Nineteen percent of all lands within 100 km of the coast (excludingAntarctica and water bodies) are classified as altered, meaning theyare in agricultural or urban uses; 10 percent are semialtered, involvinga mosaic of natural and altered vegetation; and 71 percent fall withinthe least modified category. A large percentage of this least modifiedcategory includes many uninhabited areas in northern latitudes.

Many important coastal habitats, such as mangroves, wetlands,seagrasses, and coral reefs, are disappearing at a fast pace. Anywherefrom 5 to 80 percent of original mangrove area in various countries,where such data are available, is believed to have been lost. Extensivelosses have occurred particularly in the last 50 years.

In the 24 countries for which sufficient data were available, trawlinggrounds encompass 8.8 million km, of which about 5.2 million kmare located on the continental shelves. This represents about 57percent of the total continental shelf area of these countries.

Though highly scale dependent, this analysis presents a newstandardized estimate of coastline length by country. The associatedtotal coastline length for the world is 1.6 million kilometers. This studyalso presents new estimates of ocean surface area within the 200nautical miles limits of most countries.

Information on the location and extent of coastal ecosystemsis very incomplete and inconsistent at the global level.

Historical data describing previous extent of habitats,against which we might hope to measure change, are verylimited. Where no historical data exist, the possibility of predictive mapping should be considered, using existingclimatic, oceanographic, and topographic data combinedwith biogeographic information.

There is an urgent need for better and more consistentclassification schemes and data sets characterizing theworld's coasts. Particular effort needs to be focussed onmapping the distribution of sandy and rocky shores, saltmarshes, seagrasses, tidal mudflats, and lagoons.

Coastal habitats occur over relatively small spatial units, areoften submerged, and are, therefore, difficult to assess withthe coarse-scale global sensors often used for otherterrestrial ecosystems. High-resolution remote sensingcapabilities in this area are improving rapidly, but are notyet being widely applied.

The effects of human disturbances to ecosystems, such astrawling, are poorly documented. More accurate evaluationof impacts will require higher resolution data as well as siteexploration.


20/93



Shorel ine Stabi l iza t ionPAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS


Natural versus altered landcover within 100 km of coastline

GLCCD 1998. Rough indicator of the likelihood of natural shoreline replaced by artificial structures.

Beach area/profile Cambers 1997. Measured beach erosion/accretion data available for a limited number of countries, withinconsistent time and area coverage.

Severity and impact of natural hazards

Only case studies available. Mostly measured in monetary units and of limited value for comparisons.

Vulnerability to erosion andcoastal hazard

Physical vulnerability was estimated by characterization of natural features. (See section on Extent and Change. ) Level of development was based on population density (CIESIN et al. 2000).

Low-lying areas USGS 1996 (elevation data). Based upon a coarse-scale (approximately 1 km grid resolution) data setreflecting elevation for the globe, we identified land areas less than one, and between one and twometers elevation. Local hydraulic and geophysical factors, such as subsidence, tectonic uplift, tides, andstorms, are not taken into account because of the lack of data.


Human modification of the shoreline has alteredcurrents and sediment delivery, enhancing coastlinesin some areas and starving beaches in others.

Coastal habitats with natural buffering and adaptationcapacities are being modified by development andreplaced by artificial structures. Thus, in monetaryterms, the damage from storm surges has increased.

Increasing development in coastal areas is placingmore population, infrastructure, and associatedeconomic investments at risk.

Rising sea levels projected as a result of global

warming may threaten some coastal settlements andsmall island-states.

The function of shoreline stabilization provided by many natural coastalfeatures is not well documented quantitatively.

Data on conversion of coastal habitat and shoreline erosion are inadequate. No comprehensive data are available to assess shoreline change or sediment

flows. Because of the dynamic character of the natural processes acting upon the

shoreline, and because humans have often responded in an equally dramaticway, it is difficult to distinguish natural from human-induced changes.

Information on long-term effects of human modifications on shorelines islacking.

Nonmonetary measures of severity and damage from natural hazards are

anecdotal. Sea level rise and storm effects resulting from climate change are speculative.


21/93



Wat er Qual i tyPAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS

DATA S OURCESAND COMMENTS

Eutrophication parameters Bricker et al. 1999 (U.S. data only). Data have incomplete temporal coverage in some areas and areinsufficient in detecting clear trends. Similar data are available for other developed countries butwere not used in this study.

Harmful algal blooms (HABs)events

HEED 1999. Compiled from reported public health events, as well as mortality and morbidity eventsfor marine organisms. The data do not show the magnitude of each event. In general, there are limitedground-based monitoring initiatives with regular data collection on HABs events around the world.

Global occurrence of hypoxic zones Diaz and Rosenberg 1995; Diaz 1999. Occurrences are compiled from literature and therefore may bebiased toward areas where better reporting mechanisms exist. Most observations are fromindustrialized countries. The data do not include the duration and size of each event.

Shellfish bed closures NOAA 1997 (U.S. data only). There is insufficient data coverage for temporal trend analysis and,often, inconsistent criteria for bed closures. Various country programs exist, mostly in developedcountries, but the data are not comparable.

Beach closures NRDC 1998; FEEE 2000. Various local monitoring programs exist, but no comprehensive data areavailable. A standardized guideline for monitoring recreational water quality is being developed by

the World Health Organization.Beach tar balls JODC 1999 (Japanese data only). Few of the reported observations show the magnitude of

contamination (i.e., size and concentration). Various country and regional monitoring programs exist,but the data are not harmonized and are not complete for all countries and years.

Persistent organic pollutants(POPs) and heavy metalaccumulation in marine organisms

NOAA 1999a (U.S. data only). Mussel Watch-type programs that monitor accumulation of heavymetals and POPs exist in other countries, but were not considered in this analysis.

Oil spills (frequency and volume) ITOPF 1998. The data presented here only includeaccidental spills over 7 tonnes in quantity. Theextensive ITOPF database contains information on both the spill (amount and type of oil spilt, cause,and location) and the vessel involved. Data are compiled from published sources as well as fromvessel owners and their insurers. Reporting of small operational spillages is incomplete.

Solid waste accumulation on

beaches

Center for Marine Conservation 1998. Data are based on coastal cleanup surveys that include parts of

75 countries worldwide. The information, however, is incomplete on the frequency of the cleanup andthe area covered.


Although some industrial countries have improved coastal waterquality by reducing input of certain persistent organic pollutants,chemical pollutant discharges are increasing overall as agricultureintensifies and new synthetic compounds are developed.

As the extent of mangroves, coastal wetlands, and seagrassesdeclines, coastal habitats are losing their pollutant-filteringcapacity.

On a global basis, nutrient inputs to coastal waters seem to beincreasing because of population increase and agriculturalintensification.

Over the past two decades, the frequency of recorded HABsresulting in mass mortality and morbidity of marine organisms hasincreased significantly.

Globally reported occurrences of hypoxia indicate that somecoastal ecosystems have exceeded their ability to absorb nutrients.

Although large-scale marine oil spills are declining, oil dischargesfrom land-based sources and regular shipping operations arebelieved to be increasing.

Global data on extent and change of key coastal habitats, such aswetlands and seagrasses, are not available.

Many national and regional monitoring programs exist for a varietyof pollutants, but the completeness and accuracy of data collectedvaries. Standardized sampling methodologies and parameters arenecessary for making comparisons on a global basis.

Increased direct monitoring of water quality parameters, coupledwith using satellite sensors, can greatly improve our knowledge of the condition of the world's coastal waters.

Current information relies heavily on anecdotal observations of extreme events, such as HABs, and not on continuous monitoring.

More than 70,000 synthetic chemicals have been discharged intothe ocean, and only a small percentage of these have beenmonitoredtypically by human health standards, and not byecological impact.

Runoff and routine maintenance of oil infrastructure are estimatedto account for more than 70 percent of the total annual oildischarge into the ocean, but actual data regarding such nonpointsources are not available.


22/93



Biodivers i tyPAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS


Littoral community: Groombridge and Jenkins 1996 (diversity of seabirds, marine turtles, seals,and sea lions by region); Spalding 1998 (mangroves); UNEP-WCMC 1999c (distribution andspecies richness of marine turtles); UNEP-WCMC 1999d (pinnipeds, unpublished data preparedfor this study). Information on species richness is only available for some better-known speciesgroups.

Species richness

Continental shelves: Groombridge and Jenkins 1996 (diversity of seagrasses, molluscs, shrimp,lobsters, sharks, and cetaceans); Veron 1995 (corals). The data are limited to better-documentedspecies.

Conservation values Olson and Dinerstein 1998; Sullivan Sealey and Bustamante 1999; UNEP-WCMC 1999 (marineprotected areas); CI 2000. Criteria for evaluation of conservation value, designation of the status,and degree of protection are highly varied.

Threatened species IUCN 1996. Global list developed through field observation and expert judgment. Applicationof the criteria for threatened status to littoral and marine species requires further evaluation.

Habitat degradationcoral bleaching NOAA-NESDIS and UNEP-WCMC 1999, unpublished data. Data on observations of coralbleaching were compiled from multiple sources.

Coral reefs: ICLARM 1999. Observed impacts of pollution, sedimentation, and destructivefishing practices on coral reefs.

Threats to habitat

Littoral zone: Evans 1994 (Important Bird Areas). The criteria for ranking the level of threat arequalitative and rely on expert opinion.

Threats to ecosystem structure Invasive species data compiled from multiple sources. There are no global data sets onintroduced species, although comprehensive data are available for some countries and regions.


Coastal habitats that serve as nurseries for many speciesare disappearing at an alarming rate. Human modificationand disturbance to those habitats are widespread.

Growth in the number of marine protected areas over the lastcentury indicates increased awareness toward protecting thecoastal environment although methods and degree of protection vary greatly among countries.

Over 25 different coral diseases or variants are recordedin over 50 countries worldwide and the vast majority of records are from the 1970s onward. Reports of coralbleaching have also increased significantly in recentyears.

Even some commercial fish species, such as Atlantic Cod,five species of tuna, and haddock are now threatened

globally, as are several species of whales, seals, and seaturtles. Invasive species are frequently reported in enclosed seas,

such as the Black Sea, where the introduction of theAtlantic comb jellyfish caused the collapse of the thrivinganchovy fishery.

Information on the distribution of remaining natural coastal habitats isonly available for some areas. Detailed maps are particularly lacking forsubmerged habitats, such as seagrasses, coral reefs, salt marshes, andtidal mudflats.

Loss of coastal habitats (such as mangroves or wetlands) is reported inmany parts of the world, but little is documented quantitatively.

Species diversity is not well inventoried and population assessments areonly available for some keystone species, such as sea turtles and whales.

Available information on the distribution of species needs to beconsolidated and integrated with information on habitat distribution.

Information on invasive species is limited because of difficulties inidentifying and inventorying them. Assessing their impact on the nativeecosystem is also necessary but currently lacking.

Limited information is available on the condition of ecosystems at thehabitat level. For example, anecdotal observations are available for theworld's coral reefs, reflecting coral bleaching, disease, and humanimpacts, but little data have been compiled on coral condition, such aschange in live coral cover.

Indicators of change in ecosystem structure have not been fully explored.


23/93



Food Product ion Mar ine F i she r i e sPAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS


Analysis of the condition of fish stocks Grainger and Garcia 1996 and Garcia and De Leiva Moreno 2000. Analyses include stockassessments covering the period 19501994 for the top 200 commercial fisheries, andassessments of 441 fish stocks covering the period 19741999.

Commercial harvest of important fishstocks

FAO 1999e. Data refer to marine fisheries production for selected species in the NorthwestAtlantic.

Percentage change in catch from thepeak year

FAO 1999e and 1999f. Current catch figures for each FAO fishing area were compared tohistorical peak catches for that same area.

Change in trophic composition of fishcatch

Analysis conducted by Caddy, Garibaldi, and Grainger (1999) at FAO Fisheries Department forthis study. The analysis uses three indicators to assess the change in species composition of thecatch in each FAO fishing area, with the exclusion of the Arctic and Antarctic. The threeindicators are:a. sum of catches for the top five species in each of four trophic categories over the 195097

period;b. trend relationship between the piscivores and zooplanktivores catches; andc. percentage of catches of the different trophic levels early (195054) and late (l99397) in

the series.


Global marine fish production has increased sixfold since 1950, but the rate of increase annually for fish caught in the wild has slowed from 6 percent in the 1950sand 1960s to 0.6 percent in 199596.

In 1997, fish and shellfish provided 16.5 percent of the totalanimal proteinconsumed by humans worldwide. Of the 30 countries most dependent on fish as aprotein source, all but 4 are in the developing world.

The capacity of coastal and marine ecosystems to produce fish for human harvest ishighly degraded by overfishing, destructive trawling techniques, and loss of coastalnursery areas.

Seventy-five percent of all fish stocks for which information is available are in urgentneed of better management. Twenty-eight percent are already depleted from pastoverfishing or in imminent danger of depletion from current overharvesting, and forty-seven percent are being fished at their biological limit and therefore vulnerable todepletion if fishing intensity increases.

The percentage catch of low-value species in the harvest has risen, as the catch fromhigher-value species has plateaued or declined, masking some effects of overfishing.This change in the piscivore/zooplanktivore ratio provides some evidence of likelyecosystem change.

Notable ecosystem changes have occurred over the last half century in some fisheryareas, such as the North Atlantic and Northeast Pacific.

Some of the recent increase in the marine fish harvest comes from aquaculture, whichhas more than doubled in production since 1990.

Worldwide, some 30 to 40 percent more harvest capacity exists than the resource can

withstand. Bycatch levels are also high. FAO estimates the amount of fish discarded at about 20million metric tons per year. This figure is the equivalent of about 25% of thereported annual production from marine capture fisheries.

Expansion of oceanic fisheries still continues, with a start now being made atexploitation of deep-water resources, which to date are relatively unprotected byinternational agreements and regulations.

FAO fisheries production statistics are limitedto providing proximate information oncommercial fish population trends and are,therefore, insufficient to assess the capacity of coastal and marine ecosystems to provide food.

The FAO database on marine fisherieslandings is the most complete data set at theglobal level; however it has importantlimitations. Some of the main problems are thatmuch of the catch is not reported at the specieslevel, particularly in the Indian Ocean andCentral Pacific, and the subsistence and small-scale fisheries sector is underrepresented inthe data collection efforts.

Catch statistics are also biased as a result of unreported discarding, misreporting of harvests, and exclusion of all information onillegal fishing.

Data are fragmentary on how many boats aredeployed, and how much time is spent fishing,which obscures the full impact of fishing onecosystems.

No comprehensive data are available foraverage fish size, which would help in theassessment of the condition of particular fishpopulations.

More extensive stock assessments arenecessary to identify Maximum SustainableYield (MSY) for various commerciallyimportant species.


24/93



Touri sm and Recre at ionPAGE MEASURESAND INDICATORS


Value of tourism and employment in thetourism sector

WTTC 1999. Value of tourism is estimated in terms of dollars per year, and employment interms of jobs in the sector. Statistics are not specific tocoastal tourism, but to tourism in general.

Importance of tourism to the economy CTO 1997 (Caribbean data only). Data are expressed in dollars as a percent of gross domesticproduct (GDP) and number of jobs in the tourism sector as percent of total employment.

Tourist arrivals CTO 1997 (Caribbean data only).

Equitable distribution of tourismbenefitleakage of tourism revenue

Smith and Jenner1992; Wells 1997. Percentage of gross tourism receipts collected by non-localservice providers.


The travel and tourism industry is the fastest growing sector of theglobal economy. It is estimated to have generated US$3.5 trillion andalmost 200 million jobs globally in 1999. Coastal tourism is a majorportion of the gross domestic product in many small island nations.

Impacts of tourism on the environment are generally local andextremely diverse. Impacts depend upon the local environment, sizeand growth rate of the tourism sector, and nature of the tourismfacilities involved.

The tourist trade has degraded some areas, but global evidence isinsufficient to judge the aggregate capacity of coastal areas to supporttourism. As coastal areas are degraded, however, the types of tourismsupported can become more limited.

The degree to which a local economy benefits from tourism variestremendously, depending on the habitat (resource), ownership andinvestments, and management of the tourism activities.

Currently, 21 European countries participate in the Blue FlagCampaign, a certification program for sustainable tourism. In 2000,1,873 beaches and 652 marinas were awarded the Blue Flag, adramatic increase over a decade, indicating heightened interest fromtourist facilities in adopting more efficient and environmentally soundpractices.

Not all countries report tourism statistics, and typically, onlynational data on tourism are available, rather than dataspecific to the coastal zone.

Comprehensive information on the environmental andsocioeconomic impacts of tourism is not available or isdocumented only qualitatively.

No standard measure of tourism intensity exists. Information on the benefit of tourism to the local economy is

very limited. Marine protected areas and tourism certification programs

could help in collecting useful information on the value of nature-based tourism and the degree of benefits and impactsof overall tourism development to the local people andeconomy.

A few tourism certification programs with varied criteria exist

but no comprehensive data are available. The importance of assessing local capacity to physically andsocially accommodate tourism development has beenacknowledged. However, no standard indicator to measure thiscapacity has been developed.


25/93



C o n c l u s i o n sAlong with direct loss of area, a variety of other factors are sig-nificantly altering coastal ecosystems around the world. Someof the major pressures are population growth, pollution, over-harvesting and destructive fishing practices, and the loomingthreat of climate change.

Globally, the number of people living within 100 km of thecoast increased from roughly 2 billion in 1990 to 2.2 billion in199539 percent of the worlds population. However, the num-ber of people whose activities affect coastal ecosystems is muchlarger than the actual coastal population because rivers deliverpollutants from inland watersheds and populations to estuariesand surrounding coastal waters. As coastal and inland popula-tions continue to grow, their impactsin terms of pollutant loadsand the development and conversion of coastal habitatscanbe expected to grow as well.

An increasing number of pollutants affect the worlds coasts

and oceans. Most pollution of coastal waters comes from theland, but atmospheric sources and marine-based sources suchas oil leaks and spills from vessels also play a role. Nutrientpollution, especially nitrates and phosphates, has increaseddramatically this century. Greater use of fertilizers, growth inquantities of domestic and industrial sewage, and increasedaquaculture, which releases considerable amounts of waste di-rectly into the water, are all contributing factors (GESAMP1990:96).

In terms of food production, forty-five years of increasingfishing pressure have left many major fish stocks depleted or indecline. The scale of the global fishing enterprise has grown

rapidly and exploitation of fish stocks has followed a predict-able pattern, progressing from region to region across the worldsoceans. As each area in turn reaches its maximum productionlevel, it then begins to decline (Grainger and Garcia 1996:8,4244). Overexploitation of fish, shellfish, seaweeds, and othermarine organisms not only diminishes production of the har-vested species but can profoundly alter species compositionand the biological structure of coastal ecosystems.

Global climate change may compound other pressures oncoastal ecosystems through the additional effects of warmerocean temperatures, altered ocean circulation patterns, chang-ing storm frequency, and rising sea levels. Changing concen-trations of CO2 in ocean waters may also affect marine produc-tivity or even change the rate of coral calcification (Kleypas etal. 1999). Rising sea level, associated

page coastal

Documents