Transcript Document 7228591

Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment Overview
September 2003
ISSUE: Human demand for ecosystem services is quickly
growing around the world…
Food
Food production must
increase to meet the
needs of an additional 3
billion people over the
next 30 years
Water
Timber
One-third of the
world’s population is
now subject to water
scarcity.
Wood fuel is the only
source of fuel for one
third of the world’s
population.
Population facing
water scarcity will
double over the next 30
years
Wood demand will
double in next 50 years.
ISSUE: A recent study* shows that the capacity of many
ecosystems to provide certain services has been declining…
Ecosystem Type
Key
Condition of
Ecosystem
Services
Food-Fiber Production
Excellent
Good
Water Quality
Fair
Poor
Water Quantity
Bad
Not Assessed
Biodiversity
Carbon Storage
Changing
Capacity
Decreasing
Increasing
Mixed
*Source: Pilot Assessment of Global Ecosystems. 2000. WRI, IFPRI
ISSUE:
Despite knowledge of the increasing demand and diminishing
or endangered supply, science is not being effectively brought
to bear on these challenges…

Existing mechanisms for linking science and policy are highly
sectoral whereas the major problems today are increasingly
multisectoral.


Significant issues identified by scientists are not on policy
agendas.


Such mechanisms include: Forest Resource Assessment, World
Water Assessment, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, etc.
E.g., Change in nitrogen and phosphorous cycles receives little
attention outside of scientific literature
New data sources, methodologies and models are underutilized
in many countries.

E.g., Remote sensing tools and data; Scenarios development
The Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment is:
An

international scientific assessment to be completed in 2004
Designed to meet a portion of the assessment needs of

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD),

Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD),

Ramsar Wetlands Convention,

other partners including the private sector and civil society

Focused on the consequences of changes in ecosystems for
human well-being

Undertaken at multiple scales (local to global)

Designed to both provide information and build capacity to
provide information

Expected to be repeated at 5-10 year intervals if it
successfully meets needs
The MA focuses on:

Ecosystem services

The consequences of changes in
ecosystems for human well being

The consequences of changes in
ecosystems for other life on earth
Ecosystem Services are the benefits people obtain
from ecosystems
Provisioning
Regulating
Cultural
Goods produced or
provided by
ecosystems
Benefits obtained
from regulation of
ecosystem processes
Non-material benefits
obtained from
ecosystems
• food
• fresh water
• fuel wood
• fiber
• biochemicals
• genetic resources
• climate regulation
• disease regulation
• flood regulation
• spiritual
• recreational
• aesthetic
• inspirational
• educational
• communal
• symbolic
• detoxification
Supporting
Services necessary for production of other ecosystem services
• Soil formation
• Nutrient cycling
• Primary production
The MA considers the consequences of ecosystem
change for human well-being
The MA is an Integrated Assessment
IPCC looks at impacts of one driver (climate) on different systems;
MA will integrate the effects of multiple drivers on all ecosystems
Driver
Response
Human
Impact
Climate Land Cover Biodiversity Nutrient
Change Change
Loss
Loading
Climate Change
Energy
Food
Biodiversity
Sector
Supply
Health
Economics
IPCC
Water
Social
Ecosystems
Health
Economics
Social
Millennium Assessment
Etc.
Organizational Structure of the MA
MA Board
Review
Board Chairs
Assessment Panel
Working Group Chairs
Support Functions
Director, Administration,
Logistics, Data Management
Sub-Global Assessment
Working Group
Outreach &
Engagement
Condition
Scenarios
Response
Global Assessment Working Groups
Chapter
Review
Editors
Status: MA Timeline of Activities
3rd WG Mtgs
2nd Design
Mtg
1st Design Mtg
2001
UN Launch
Begin Review
2nd WG Mtgs
Joint WG
Mtg
1st WG Mtgs
2002
2003
Conceptual Framework
Report
Release
Board
Approval
Review WG
Mtgs
2004
2005
Assessment & Synthesis
Release &
Outreach
The MA Board and design are reflective of a
full spectrum of stakeholder groups:
International organizations
National and sub-national
governments
• The MA was featured as a key
action in the UN SecretaryGeneral’s “Millennium
Report”, April 2000
• ~180 governments have
endorsed the MA through
their participation in
international conventions
• The MA was launched by Kofi
Annan, June 2001
• Administrative authorities are
also engaged as users at
other levels
• 13 international institutions
are directly represented on
the MA Board
Private sector
•
•
•
MA has developed a close relationship with the World Business
Council on Sustainable Development
Individual companies are represented by Board members
MA findings will be relevant to intermediaries such as credit
agencies, institutional investors, and trade organizations
Local communities and civil
society
• Traditional knowledge of
indigenous groups will be
incorporated in the MA
• MA has been designed to
meet some assessment needs
of indigenous and local
communities
Media and Public
• MA will provide information
to various news outlets,
journals, etc.
• Findings may become part of
a public information
campaign on ecosystems
Status: Development of Content











Conceptual Framework Report completed
500 Authors, 80 countries
2-3 meetings of each Working Group
Cross-cut meetings: Biodiv, Drivers, Health, Food, Marine,
Water
Zero order draft chapters for ~all chapters except SubGlobal
10 Sub-global assessments approved
12 additional ‘candidates’
Review Board established
Core datasets available
On-line data catalog and exploration tool
Cross-check against user needs
Status: Process of User
Engagement






Strengthened CBD and Ramsar Authorization
and CCD links
CMS new authorizing convention
Country strategies underway in 25 countries
(e.g., national user forums during 2003
involving ~700 people)
Private sector industry group briefings +
WBCSD workshops
Board communications committee
20 National Academies as partners
The Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment (MA)
First MA
Product,
published
September
2003
Conceptual Framework Report:
“Ecosystems and Human Well-Being”
Purpose:
 To provide a unified approach, rationale, and
terminology for the assessment



All members of the assessment panel and CLAs from all
Working Groups were engaged in writing
To inform MA users as well as the scientific
community of the nature of the product to come
and its foundation
To provide information to those interested in
applying elements of the MA in other assessment
activities
Conceptual Framework
Using the Conceptual Framework as a guide,
MA Working Groups will try to answer core
questions
Conditions and Trends Working
Group


What is the current condition and
historical trends of ecosystems
and their services?
What have been the
consequences of changes in
ecosystems for human wellbeing?
Scenarios Working Group

Given plausible changes in
primary drivers, what will be the
consequences for ecosystems,
their services, and human wellbeing?
Responses Working Group

What can we do about it?
Sub-Global Assessment Working Group
All of the above… at sub-global scales
Condition and Trends Assessment Report
I
Introduction

CF, Methods, Drivers, Biodiversity,
Human Well-Being and Vulnerability
II Ecosystem Services

Analysed by major ecosystem
services
III Condition and Causality –
Analyzed by Ecosystems

Multiple services from various
systems
IV Synthesis
MA Reporting Categories or “Systems”
examples
MARINE
Ocean, with fishing typically a
major driver of change
Marine areas where the sea is deeper than 50
meters.
COASTAL
Interface between ocean and land,
extending seawards to about the
middle of the continental shelf and
inland to include all areas strongly
influenced by the proximity to the
ocean
Area between 50 meters below mean sea level
and 50 meters above the high tide level or
extending landward to a distance 100 kilometers
from shore. Includes coral reefs, intertidal zones,
estuaries, coastal aquaculture, and seagrass
communities.
INLAND
WATER
Permanent water bodies inland
from the coastal zone, and areas
whose ecology and use are
dominated by the permanent,
seasonal, or intermittent occurrence
of flooded conditions
Rivers, lakes, floodplains, reservoirs, and
wetlands; includes inland saline systems. Note
that the Ramsar Convention considers “wetlands”
to include both inland water and coastal
categories.
Goal: Develop scenarios that embrace a useful range
of plausible futures of the world’s ecosystem services

Our vision of scenarios

Embrace plausible outcomes of unpredictable
and ambiguous drivers (as well as predictable
ones)


Consistent with state-of-the-art ecological
information


Emphasize surprises, not central tendencies
Quantitative and qualitative
To the year 2050 (slices looking at years
between now and then)
Rosy
More Positive
Joint Development with
Responses
Working Group
Retrospective
Based on Millennium Development Goals
No new modeling
Varied
Expt
More Neutral
Techno
Fix
Develop
Fix
Developed by Scenarios
Working Group
Prospective
Quantified
More Negative
Fortress
Scenarios Framework
Relationships and Interactions of People and Nature
connected
Technological fix
Development Fix
disaggregated
Fortress
responsive
Varied
Experiments
proactive
Approach to cross-scale feedbacks
Scenarios Assessment Report Outline
Executive Summary
Preface
Chapter 1. History of global scenarios
Chapter 2. Ecology in global scenarios
Chapter 3. Driving forces
Chapter 4. Assessment of quantification and modeling
approaches
Chapter 5. Methods
Chapter 6. Preamble to the scenarios
Chapter 7. Storylines
Chapter 8. Ecosystem goods and services across the scenarios
Chapter 9. Human well-being across the scenarios
Chapter 10. Trade-offs among ecosystem services
Chapter 11. Synthesis: Lessons learned
Chapter 12. Synthesis: Policy implications
Responses Working Group Timeline



1st WG Meeting: New Delhi, June
2002
Zero Order Drafts: March 2003
2nd WG Meeting: Frankfurt, May 2003
Responses in the MA
Responses are defined as the range of
policies or measures that impact the state and
functioning of ecosystems:




Measures that impact eco-systems directly or
indirectly
Initiated by decision makers at global, regional or
local levels
Legal, economic, financial, institutional,
technological, social or cognitive interventions
Planned to affect indirect drivers, direct drivers, or
human well-being
Responses Assessment Report
Structure
Part I:
Conceptual Framework for
Evaluating Responses
Part II: Assessment of Past and Current
Responses
Part III: Synthesis: “Ingredients for successful
responses”
Multiple Scales
The MA is a multi-scale assessment - it is expected that findings
at any scale of a multi-scale assessment will differ from those of
a single-scale assessment as a result of information and
perspectives from other scales
Why undertake a multi-scale
assessment?




Permit social and ecological
processes to be assessed at their
characteristic scale
Allow greater spatial, temporal,
causal detail to be considered as
scale becomes finer
Allow independent validation of
larger-scale conclusions
Permit reporting and response
options matched to the scale
where decision-making takes
place
Global Assessment
Users
Regional
Regional
Development
Banks, etc.
National
National
Government
Local
Local
Community
MA Cross-cutting Issues
Seven issues were identified that cut across all working groups.
Special meetings have been held to address these “cross-cutting” issues.
2002
2003
2004
Condition
Scenarios
Responses
Sub-Global
Drivers
Biodiversity
Health
Food
Coastal
Marine
Drylands Prague
Combined WG
Water
What are the Outputs of the Global
Assessment?
2003

People and Ecosystems: A Framework for Assessment


Release: September
MA Data Catalog

Datasets being used in the MA
2004

Conference Proceedings: Bridging Scales and
Epistemologies in Multi-scale Assessments
2005

Technical Assessment Reports (300-800 pages ea.) and
Summaries for Decision-makers (SDMs)





Sub-global Assessment
Condition/Trends Assessment
Scenario Assessment
Response Options Assessment
Summary Volume (SDMs of 4 reports)
Assessment Outputs: Global (continued)
2005

Synthesis Reports (30-50 page)









Ecosystems and Human Well-being
Biodiversity (CBD)
Desertification (CCD)
Wetlands (Ramsar)
Private Sector
Health and Ecosystems (tentative)
Food and Cultivated Systems (tentative)
Board Summary of Key Messages (10 p.)
Other Products




Reports available over internet (multiple language for summary docs)
Interactive web-based MA indicator exploration capability
Partnerships for expanded outreach: radio, theatre, documentaries,
film (tentative)
Partnerships for capacity-building/training outreach (tentative)
What are the Outputs of the Sub-Global
Assessments?

India



Southern Africa Assessment












Pilot Assessment (2000)
Final Assessment (2005)
Pilot Assessment (2002)
Final Assessment (2005)
Norway Pilot Assessment (2002)
Coastal British Columbia (Final 2004)
Small Islands of Papua New Guinea (Final 2005)
Laguna Lake Basin Philippines (Final 2005)
Northern Range Trinidad (Final 2005)
Sweden Local Assessments (Final 2005)
Salar de Atacama, Chile (Final 2005)
Mekong Wetlands, Vietnam (Final 2005)
Sinai Peninsula (Final 2005)
Western China (Final 2006)
Capacity Building
A Central Objective of the MA, capacity building
will occur through multiple outlets:

Access to Data/Information
Sub-Global Assessments
Training Materials
Young Fellows Program
Scenarios and Modeling Training Course

Partnerships for Distance Learning




The Secretariat remains open to the identification and
development of other capacity building opportunities during
the course of the assessment.
Distributed Secretariat
Individuals and Organizations around the world support the entire
process
Condition TSU
UNEP-WCMC, U.K.
Scenarios TSU
SCOPE, France
(& South Africa)
(& Italy, United States)
Response Options TSU
Institute for Economic
Growth, India
(& RIVM, Netherlands)
GEF, UNF Grant
Administration
UNEP,Kenya
Director’s Office
The World Fish Center
(ICLARM), Malaysia
Sub-Global TSU,
ICLARM, Malaysia
Meeting Support
Meridian Institute, USA
Outreach & Engagement
WRI & Meridian Institute,
USA
TSU: Technical Support Unit . Organizations/countries listed in parentheses provide or host additional support and technical staff
MA receives financial and in-kind
contributions from a variety of sources
FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS
(~ $17 MILLION)
Sponsors
IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS
(~ $6 MILLION)
• Norway
• Global Environment Facility
• China
• United Nations Foundation
• India
• Packard Foundation
• Japan
• World Bank
• Germany
• United Nations Environment
Program
• Netherlands
Other Donors
• United States (NASA, USGS,
ORNL, USDA)
• Government of Norway
• European Commission
• Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
• Rockefeller Foundation
• FAO, UNDP, WHO, UNESCO,
UNEP
• NASA
• ICRAF, ICLARM
• ICSU
• Numerous other countries,
NGOs, Universities and other
institutions are supporting
travel costs of experts
• Swedish International
Biodiversity Programme
• Christensen Fund
Visit the MA Website
www.millenniumassessment.org