European Environment Agency

Resilience, Reduction and Responsiveness

Some lessons from Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Jacqueline McGladeEuropean Environment Agency

European Environment Agency

Unsustainable consumption & production patterns

Globally, environmental pressures are growing in terms of GHG emissions, water and air pollution, land use, resource use and waste

In Europe these impacts are still growing across all stages of the production – consumption chain. Without environmental legislation it would have been far worse

Social and ecological resilience are now at risk

European Environment Agency

EU-25 use of world biocapacity compared to population share

Source: EEA/GFN, 2005: Global ecological overshoot

European Environment Agency

Natural margins

European Environment Agency

Natural assets

fodder production tourist attraction

pollination

carbon sequestrationflood protection

water purification

slope stability

biodiversity

recreation

beauty

fibre production

food production

stabilising micro-climate

recreation

shelter for life stockgame reserve

European Environment Agency

Capital assets

European Environment Agency

World trade is a driving force

Source: WTO, 2003: index = value deflated by unit value.

European Environment Agency

 

Unsustoppable

European Environment Agency

 

Unstable

European Environment Agency

 

World economic growth 1990–2001 and links to the use of environmental services (EEA)

From empty to full world

European Environment Agency

 

Enlightenment

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Largest assessment ever undertaken of the health of ecosystems· Prepared by 1360 experts from 95 countries;

extensive peer review· Consensus of the world’s scientists

Designed to meet needs of decision-makers among government, business, civil society· Information requested through 4 international

conventions

Secret of successful assessments

Political Legitimacy

Scientific Credibility

Saliency – Focus on User Needs

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Direct Drivers

Indirect Drivers

EcosystemServices

Human Well-being

Direct Drivers of Change Changes in land use Species introduction or removal Technology adaptation and use External inputs (e.g., irrigation) Resource consumption Climate change Natural physical and biological

drivers (e.g., volcanoes)

Indirect Drivers of Change Demographic Economic (globalization, trade,

market and policy framework) Sociopolitical (governance and

institutional framework) Science and Technology Cultural and Religious

Human Well-being and Poverty Reduction

Basic material for a good life Health Good Social Relations Security Freedom of choice and action

Life on Earth: Biodiversity

MA Conceptual Framework

RegulatingBenefits obtained from

regulation of ecosystem processes

CulturalNon-material benefits from ecosystems

ProvisioningGoods produced or

provided by ecosystems

Ecosystem services

Photo credits (left to right, top to bottom): Purdue University, WomenAid.org, LSUP, NASA, unknown, CEH Wallingford, unknown, W. Reid, Staffan Widstrand

SupportingNutrient cycling

Soil formation Primary productivity

Main Questions

• What is the rate and scale of ecosystem change?• What are the consequences of ecosystem change for

the services provided by ecosystems and for human-well being?

• How might ecosystems and their services change over the next 50 years?

• What options exist to conserve ecosystems and enhance their contributions to human well-being?

Using Multi-Scale Assessments

Regional

UsersRegional Development Banks, etc.

NationalGovernment

Local Community

Global Assessment

National

Local

Rationale Characteristic scale of processes

Greater resolution at smaller

scales

Independent validation of

conclusions

Response options matched to the

scale where decision-making

takes place

Critical elements

•Research and monitoring•Assessments methodologies•Signals and Indicators of thresholds and resilience

MA Multi-Scale Assessment

MA Working Groups

Scenario Working Group Given plausible changes in

primary drivers, what will be the consequences for ecosystems, their services, and human well-being?

Responses Working Group What can we do to enhance well-

being and conserve ecosystems?

Sub-Global Assessment Working GroupAll of the above… at sub-global scales

Condition 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 well-being?

Synthesis Reports Board Statement

MA Conceptual Framework Technical Assessment Volumes

Main Findings

• Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.

• Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals.

• Degradation of ecosystems could grow worse but can be reversed.

• Workable solutions will require significant changes in policy

The Balance Sheet

CropsLivestockAquacultureCarbon sequestration

Capture fisheriesWild foodsWood fuelGenetic resourcesBiochemicalsFresh WaterAir quality regulationRegional & local climate

regulationErosion regulationWater purificationPest regulationPollinationNatural Hazard

regulationSpiritual & religious Aesthetic values

TimberFiberWater regulationDisease regulationRecreation & ecotourism

Enhanced Degraded Mixed

Bottom Line: 60% of Ecosystem Services are Degraded

European Environment Agency

 

Resilience, Reduction & Responsiveness

The 3 R’s

MA Scenarios

100

50

0

Percent Change by 2050

Food Demand

70-85%

Water Withdrawal

30-85%

Species Loss

10-15% (low certainty)

Changing the economic incentives

Problem can’t be solved so long as ecosystem services are treated as free and limitless

Agricultural and fisheries production subsidies cause ecosystem service degradation.

Market mechanisms may sometimes be useful (e.g. potential to reduce nutrient releases and carbon emissions)

Promising Options

Rapid growth of Carbon market

Ecosystem Marketplace: Online information on ecosystem service markets and payments for services

European Environment Agency

Social cohesion - beyond GDP

Fiber

Food

Spiritual & religious

Freshwater

Genetic Resources

Climate regulation

Water purification

Disease regulation

Flood/Fire regulation

Recreation & tourism

Aesthetic

Economic Value ($)

Economic Valuation

Difficult or impossible

Easy

Private Benefit Capture

Difficult

Easy

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

Many services are public goods

European Environment Agency

 

social & ecological sustainability

social & ecological accountability

European Environment Agency

Happiness counts

The Unhappy Planet FoE/NEF 2006

Need for deliberative decision-making processes

• Decision-making could be improved with more information concerning the economic values of different ecosystem services (both marketed and non-marketed)

• But, not all ecosystem services that matter to people can be valued in economic terms (esp. cultural services and considerations of intrinsic value)

• Moreover, different stakeholders will place different weights on different attributes of ecosystems

• Deliberative decision-making processes provide a mechanism to enable these different types of value considerations to be articulated.

Business bottom line

New Opportunities markets

· Carbon market

incentives· payments for ecosystem

services

businesses· ecosystem restoration

technologies

Ecosystem Services Audit

Undertake an ‘ecosystem services audit’ What ecosystem services are

used or influenced? Evaluate risks to those

services Look for cost savings

Assess information needs, expertise needed, and management plans

Evaluate operating environment

Factor into business strategies

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

Year

1 billion in 1800

4 billion in 1975

2 billion in 1920

6.5 billion in 2005

World Population (billions)

Source: UN Population Division 2004; Lee, 2003; Population Reference Bureau

European Environment Agency

Accounting for each other