Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
From the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment to
IPBES
Hal MooneyStanford University
Sept 13, 2010
Issues I will discuss
1. A very brief history of the MA1. Believers and critics2. The missing pieces
2. The struggles to get a follow up process-IPBES
3. The other piece of the puzzle—GEO-BON4. The Convention on Biological Diversity
1. The 2020 target debate2. The Satoyama initiative
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
millenniumassessment.org
The Millennium Ecosystem The Millennium Ecosystem AssessmentAssessment
Brought together natural and social scientists
Viewed ecosystems, and hence biodiversity, in terms of benefits (ecosystem services) delivered to society
Provided a typology of these services
Assessed the direct and indirect drivers of changes to ecosystem services
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Human Wellbeing and
Poverty Reduction
Indirect DriversOf Change
Direct DriversOf ChangeLife on Earth:
Biodiversity
Ecosystem Services
Indirect Drivers of Change Demographic Economic (globalization, trade,
market and policy framework) Sociopolitical (governance and
institutional framework) Science and Technology Cultural and Religious
Direct Drivers of Change Changes in land use or land cover Species introductions or removals Technology adaptation and use External inputs (e.g., irrigation,
fertilizer use, pest control) Harvest and Resource
Consumption Climate Change Natural physical and biological
drivers (e.g., volcanoes, evolution)
Human Wellbeing and Poverty Reduction Material minimum for a good
life Health Good Social Relations Security Freedom and Choice
MA Framework
The MA structure
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Ecosystem Services The benefits people obtain from ecosystems
RegulatingBenefits obtained from regulation of
ecosystem processes
• climate regulation• disease regulation
• flood regulation
ProvisioningGoods produced or
provided by ecosystems
• food • fresh water• fuel wood
• genetic resources
CulturalNon-material benefits
from ecosystems
• spiritual • recreational
• aesthetic• inspirational• educational
SupportingServices necessary for production of other ecosystem services
• Soil formation• Nutrient cycling
• Primary production
The ecosystem services approach brought environmental and business communities together
The developing linkages between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and services is an important new tool for biodiversity conservation strategies
The explicit linkages made among services and human well being and poverty reduction brings new coalitions among scientists and development community
The Power of the MA framework
The main messages
We are having increasingly larger impacts on ecosystems and their services
Many segments of society have benefited from the mining of ecosystem services but the sustainability of these services is at risk
Scenarios of the future show do not show substantial abatement of degradation
But we have options to build but more favorable trajectories but these will take substantial new actions
Some indicators of high demand
• Conservation Community-Foundations and NGO’s putting new programs forward for MA type implementation
• Governments embedding ES concepts into research and policy decisions
• Business communities investing in ecosystem service markets (water, carbon, etc)
• International development funders embracing ES concepts (Sweden , UK and elsewhere)
• International policy and science communities promoting follow-on activities (current effort plus, UNEP, EU, MAII/IMOSEB)
What was the simple message that engendered such attention?
“Ecosystems provide services to society that promotes human well-being”
Policy makers; society, our constituencyBusiness community; new marketsDevelopment community; livelihoods for
poorConservation community; a new toolScientists; important new challenges
Some conservationists
Some developmental community spokespersons
Those who liked the products noted however that they were not linked to committed actions by governments
The Critics
The new players in conservation
Selling out on nature
“With scant evidence that market-based conservation works”, argues Douglas J. McCauley, the time is ripe for returning to the protection of nature for nature’s sake.
“In my view, several steps need to be taken in order to make the Ecosystem Service Concept work----”
(Casten F. Dormann. 2009. The rise of ecosystem services concept into politics and ecology: a provocation. British Ecologic al Society Bulletin. June, 2009
“The four main unresolved research areas need to be addressed - openly and transparently:
1. valuation of non-market goods;
2. uncertainty of each service's quantification;
3. data coverage for 'uncommon' ecosystem services;
4. unifying modelling approaches.”
Dormann. 2009
“Policy makers need to be actively disillusioned that the 'new' concept will not be the silver bullet to all the problems remaining unresolved for decades. “
“Scientific proposals for policy action, based on ESS quantification (and possibly valuation) are only to support decision making, not substitute for it.”
Dormann. 2009
A little history
Bolin versus Woodwell
Broecker versus Woodwell
Follow up to the MA
InstitutionalIPESICSU-UNU-UNESCO
PECSSubglobals (Satoyama)Diversitas
WRIOut There
Natural Capital
http://www.icsu.org/Gestion/img/ICSU_DOC_DOWNLOAD/2350_DD_FILE_ICSU-UNESCO-UNU_Ecosystem_Report.pdf
Science priorities follow up from the MA, 2008
Carpenter et al, 2009
Program on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS)
A 10-year Research Project of ICSU
The overarching goal of PECS is to understand transitions toward or away from sustainable development
The Subglobal Assessments led to the Satoyama Initiative to be presented at Nagoya this October
Another Direct Folllow-up
http://www.cbd.int/sustainable/doc/satoyama-initiative-en.pd
http://www.biodic.go.jp/biodiversity/kobetaiwa/2-2-2_Y-Natori.pdf
The Satoyama issue is global—loss of diverse landscapes (biotic and social) due to intensification and urbanization
“Multifunctional agriculture is recognized as crucial for maintaining the viability of rural areas in Europe and has particular significance for resource and nature conservation”
This systems have co-evolved with society over centuries and are resilient to interannual climate variability
Sal and Garcia, 2007
http://zapico.aminus3.com/image/2009-03-26.html
Spanish Dehesa landscape
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dehesa_Pigs
The Natural Capital Program
More
Less
Mapping change
Willamette Valley, Natural Capital Project ,Polasky
Once ecosystem services are mapped then landscape level
valuation can be made—lots of activity in the valuation arena
One attempt to address the valuation issue—get a group of
scientists together that represent different starting points and
published positions to agree on a common position---5 years later
came the following:
On Valuation
EPA, 2009
IPBES-Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services
So what’s next
Biodiversity: Science & Biodiversity: Science & GovernanceGovernance
• Paris declaration on biodiversity• Call by the French President for a new international
mechanism for biodiversity “similar to IPCC”, for climate (Jan 05)
• Call supported by the DIVERSITAS Oaxaca declaration (Nov 05)
• Launch of a consultation on a new International Mechanism of Scientific Expertise on Biodiversity (IMoSEB; Feb 06, ISC meeting, Paris)
How could it possibly go wrong with such strong leadership from UNEP?
Angela CropperAchim Steiner
IPBES Kuala Lumpur, Nov 08
Scientists get into the room and learn about the complexities of coming to obvious conclusions
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://whatwilliweartoday.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/800px-haggling_for_sheep.jpg
Making policy is a messy process
http://www.iisd.ca/ymb/ipbes/
Both the science and policy communities move very slowly
• Most nations were in favor of a new science-policy interface but asked to see what we already have (gap analysis)
The resistance of a couple of countries related to government control of the process –back to CBD issue—sovereignty. This battle is actually not over not over.
First intergovernmental meeting in Malaysia in November, 2008
2nd meeting, Nairobi, 2009
• Much progress since 1st meeting (Putrajaya)
• Constructive atmosphere
• Broad agreement on need for IPBES
• Discussions went much further, and included governance & need for a secretariat.
• Overall agreement that discussions need to end in 2010.
• Next step: 3rd and final meeting (April 2010?)
i)i) The assessment landscape for biodiversity The assessment landscape for biodiversity and ecosystem services (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/1)and ecosystem services (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/1)ii)ii) Current and future status of biodiversity and Current and future status of biodiversity and ecosystem service indicators (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/2)ecosystem service indicators (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/2)iii)iii) Option and criteria for selection of secretariat Option and criteria for selection of secretariat (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/3)(UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/3)iv)iv) Capacity Development for Biodiversity Capacity Development for Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services Conservation and Ecosystem Services (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/4(UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/4v)v) Background document on the Background document on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/5) (UNEP/IPBES/3/INF/5)
“Since we weren’t prepared for Nairobi we need the following for the third (and final) meeting”
3rd intergovernmental negotiation mtg on IPBES
• Busan, Rep of Korea,
• 7-11 June 10
• 90 countries
• Science community represented by ICSU, DIVERSITAS & IHDP
• 3rd (final) negotiation
ICSU DIVERSITAS IHDP
Things weren’t going so well
Luckily the supporters had a contingency plan
Early warning, early lessons: monitoring trends and new scientific findings and proactively alert organizations and governments to emerging issues
Undertake regular independent integrated assessments of changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services at multiple scales and rapid targeted assessment on specific issues that are linked with, build on or inform other relevant assessment processes and prepare for a second global assessment;
Policy support and outreach: assist monitoring and reporting on biodiversity and ecosystem services changes; and package and disseminate scientific information in a manner that responds to relevant stakeholders needs.
A new intergovernmental platform
Busan outcome: Functions of IPBES
-Legal basis
IPBES will be established as an Independent Intergovernmental body administered by one or more existing UN org (UNEP/UNESCO/FAO/UNDP)
-Governance
The Plenary is the decision making body: only governments can vote (others: observers/no vote)
-Clients
IPBES will respond primarily to requests from govts, including MEAs (CBD, etc.); others (UN, private sectors, Scient. Org., NGOs) can submit requests to the Plenary .
Characteristics of IPBES
Busan outcome: Functions of IPBES1. Catalyzing the generation of knowledge
Identify and prioritize knowledge gaps and facilitate dialogue to generate new knowledge (but not undertake new research)
2. Performing regular and timely assessmentsGlobal, regional, sub-regional, thematic, new topics (i.e. emerging issues)
3. Supporting policy formulation and implementationIdentify tools and methodologies, and catalyse their use and further
development
4. Building capacityPrioritize capacity building needs, provide and call for funding for the
highest priorities, and catalyze financing by providing a forum with funders
Functions of IPBES
Busan outcome: Functions of IPBES
-Sept-Nov 2010: 65th session of UN GA should approve establishment of IPBES
-2011: First IPBES Plenary (Programme of Work, Secretariat, Governance, Funding, etc.)
IPBES: Next steps
IPBES plus GEOBON make a necessary package
Observations: GEOSS
An integrated biodiversity observation system
specimen•Species•Location•Date•Source
population•Species•Location•Date•Abundance
ecosystem•Name•Polygon•Date•Attributes
Remotelysensedimages
Tabula-tions
Attributemaps
abioticclimate•substrate•Topography•Disturbance
models
GIS
uses•product•offtake•value•users
gene•Species•Location•Date•Genes
community•Location•Date•Species 1•Species n
taxonomy•Species•Genus•Family•Class etc
species
•binomial•authority•synonyms
gazeteer
•Location•Polygon
interactions•type•intensity•from•to
Supporting information
ObservationsObservation
products
Resourcetrends
Conservationplans
Changehotspots
Biodiversityindicators
Ecosystemservices
Researchoutputs
User-definedneeds
Core of the biodiversity observation network
GEO
BO
N portal
feedbackfeedback
specimen•Species•Location•Date•Source
specimen•Species•Location•Date•Source
population•Species•Location•Date•Abundance
population•Species•Location•Date•Abundance
ecosystem•Name•Polygon•Date•Attributes
ecosystem•Name•Polygon•Date•Attributes
Remotelysensedimages
Tabula-tions
Attributemaps
abioticclimate•substrate•Topography•Disturbance
abioticclimate•substrate•Topography•Disturbance
models
GIS
uses•product•offtake•value•users
uses•product•offtake•value•users
gene•Species•Location•Date•Genes
gene•Species•Location•Date•Genes
community•Location•Date•Species 1•Species n
community•Location•Date•Species 1•Species n
taxonomy•Species•Genus•Family•Class etc
taxonomy•Species•Genus•Family•Class etc
species
•binomial•authority•synonyms
species
•binomial•authority•synonyms
gazeteer
•Location•Polygon
gazeteer
•Location•Polygon
interactions•type•intensity•from•to
interactions•type•intensity•from•to
Supporting information
ObservationsObservation
products
Resourcetrends
Conservationplans
Changehotspots
Biodiversityindicators
Ecosystemservices
Researchoutputs
User-definedneeds
Core of the biodiversity observation network
GEO
BO
N portal
feedbackfeedbackfeedbackfeedback
Finally---the coming Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity
Nagoya. October, 2010
The red targets
“The red targets, addressing dangerous biodiversity change, involve the identification of thresholds above or below which we suffer significant harm in terms of lost or degradation of ecosystem services”
Perrings from Mace
The green targets
The green targets, addressing landscape, ecosystem and species conservation goals, reflect a more value-based process – since it would depend on the array of services motivating those conservation goals.
Perrings from Mace
The blue targets
• The blue targets address the enabling conditions for the achievement of the red and green targets. These include the socio-economic and institutional conditions required for target actions to be effective
Perrings from Mace
In summary
It has only been a decade since the MA was initiated and five years since it was completed. It brought a new paradigm to bear on conservation issues which has been widely accepted although there are critics. There is much work to be done to build a firmer foundation for the ecosystem service concept and to make it more useful to decision makers at all levels from the household to the globe.
We still need to develop a better appreciation of the role that biodiversity plays in the welfare of humans everywhere
What good is biodiversity anyway?
We need to answer this question for society as a whole
Thank you