http://outdoors.webshots.com

IUCN UK Conference: Global Connections 2 - WetlandsTowards effective governance of wetland biodiversity and livelihoods:

Developed and developing country perspectives.

Professor Geoffrey Gouch & Professor Chris Spray

Inversnaid

What would the world be, once bereft

Of wet and wildness? Let them be left,

O let them be left, wildness and wet;

Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet.

http://outdoors.webshots.com

Inscribed on the walls of the Scottish Parliament

Gerard Manley Hopkins1881, visit to Loch Lomond

The world’s wetlands are wildlife are disappearing

WWF’s Living Planet reports

Index of change of size of the

populations of 194 species of birds,

mammals, reptiles,

amphibians and fish.

River dolphin

Wetland Habitats are being lost: shrinking Aral Sea 1960-2003

Aral Sea 2003 - lost biodiversity, a lost ecosystem, its “goods” and “services” = Livelihoods

Legal protection for wetland biodiversity exists

•Globally – Convention on Biological Diversity; RAMSAR Convention on migratory waterfowl

•European – Water Framework Directive; Floods Directive, Habitats Directive; Wild Birds Directive

•Nationally – Water Environment Water Services Act; Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act; Floods Risk Management (Scotland) Act; Climate Change Act

Yet wetlands, wildlife, ecosystems and livelihoods continue to be lost…..

Lake Chad

NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre

……..and damaged……..in the Developed world as well:..and damaged……..in the Developed world as well:Ecological Status of Scottish Rivers (% water bodies)Ecological Status of Scottish Rivers (% water bodies)

Rivers

2009 SEPA

(N = 2392)

•Physical changes to the wetland Physical changes to the wetland habitat and hydrology habitat and hydrology

•Barriers to Fish migrationBarriers to Fish migration

•Nutrient enrichment by diffuse Nutrient enrichment by diffuse pollution in agricultural and urban pollution in agricultural and urban environmentsenvironments

•Invasive non-native speciesInvasive non-native species

Condition Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed Not Assessed (recovering)

Wetland 68 8 24 0.3 3Upland 72 6 22 0.0 Geological Feature 91 6 3 0.2 4Coastal 33 40 26 1.4 5Freshwater 15 85 0 0.0 12 Marine 99 0 1 0.0 56Lowland Heath 53 14 33 0.1 3Grasslands 54 22 25 0.0 6Woodland 45 27 28 0.0 2

All Habitats 62 15 22 0.2 5(% features assessed)

Scottish Natural Heritage

Even the best habitats: Condition of Scottish Sites of Special Scientific Interest

At the same time, some major conservation successes also:

Winter population estimates for Svalbard Barnacle Goose, 1961 to 2009

WWT data.

100% world population winters in SW Scotland, at WWT 100% world population winters in SW Scotland, at WWT Caerlaverock . . . . . . . potential conflict with agricultural Caerlaverock . . . . . . . potential conflict with agricultural livelihoods of local farmerslivelihoods of local farmers

Why are losses of wetland biodiversity continuing?

Population growth

Economic development

Changes in Land use

Nutrient enrichment

Invasive species

Over harvesting

Climate change

Why are losses of wetland biodiversity continuing?

1. In the Developed world, we are increasingly remote from the Environment and Biodiversity – and so do not recognise the deliverers and beneficiaries of biodiversity and ecosystem services locally or globally, nor the impacts of change

2. We do not value biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it underpins – beyond just the provisioning (agriculture, food, fibre, etc) and visible market services

3. There is a gap or “paradigm lock” between scientists and policy - makers

1. Need to recognise the deliverers and beneficiaries of ecosystem services

“Upstream” habitat & land management

“Downstream” habitat loss &

flooding

Biodiversity loss/conservation has potential multiple costs and benefits

How can these be equitably allocated?

2. Society does not value the environment for its total sustainable worth

Provisioning Services

(market goods)

Supporting, Regulating,

Cultural services

(non market)

Who gains/loses?

Need new methods to assess values to ALL stakeholders

3. Cultural Gap between science and policy: different perspectives

Scientists Policy makers•Always scientists, life tenure!•No understanding of policy process•Love travel & conferences & workshops•Revel in complexity, meetings go on for hours•Scientific uncertainty, precautionary principle •Long technical scientific papers•Results throw up new uncertainties, possible research and grant opportunities•Scientific value, not costs•Rewards for pure academic excellence•Publish in peer-reviewed journals

•Rarely scientists, move every few years•Interested in policy process•Hate conferences, won’t travel!•Want simplicity, meetings last minutes•Want certainty, absolutes and limits•1 x A4 paper, uninterested in technical detail•Results not more questions; and clearly for the Minister right now•Economic costs and benefits clear•Rewards for policy delivery and impact•Publish press releases and grey literature

•Policy makers want to know how to set defensible standards – operational tools, results and clarity, not more questions

•Scientists want to explore uncertainties - understanding processes and impacts

Are scientists looking at the questions the policy makers want answering?

Are scientists and policy makers involving other stakeholders who rely on the services provided by healthy functioning ecosystems and their biodiversity? - top down or bottom up?

• Policy is driven by broad issues rather than narrow ones

• Scientists frequently concentrate on specific questions

?3. Paradigm Lock between science and policy: different perspectives

Moving towards a biodiversity and livelihoods approach based around ecosystem services and a landscape scale approach

• Climate Change adaptation – Scottish Rural Land Use Strategy - March 2011• “Rewilding” - Beaver introductions• River Basin Management Plans – integrating biodiversity priorities in catchments• Sustainable flood management plans – opportunities for natural wetlands and habitat restoration

Key Uncertainty: functional linkage between Biodiversity and LivelihoodsKey Uncertainty: functional linkage between Biodiversity and Livelihoods

21/04/23 18EU TEEB Report: Cost of Policy Inaction (2008)

Biodiversity underpins ecosystems and the benefits of ecosystems (services) all depend on biodiversity.

Wetland Ecosystems have been radically changed to increase provisioning services (agriculture), BUT at what cost to wider stakeholder livelihoods?

What are the impacts on the other (largely unmeasured) regulating, cultural and supporting services?

Are there tipping points?

Is it reversible?

Recent developments linking Biodiversity and Livelihoods in UK and Scottish policy

Various projects in UK and England:• Defra’s Ecosystem Approach project• Defra’s Ecosystem Action Plan• National Ecosystem Assessment• Natural England’s Ecosystem Services Pilot Areas

Key Initiatives in Scotland:• Scottish synthesis of National Ecosystem Assessment• Scottish Government’s Model Ecosystem Framework• Rural Land Use Study• Scottish Biodiversity Committee – Ecosystem groups• Species and Habitat Framework Action Plans (SNH)• River Basin Management Plans