Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Reporting on Rates of Biodiversity Loss Walter Reid Director, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Guest Scientist, WorldFish Center, Malaysia Project Manager, UNEP, Nairobi [email protected] Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through lens of the audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks Effective assessments and reporting Credible Must be of the high scientific credibility Legitimate What we report and the process by which it is reported must be seen by stakeholders to be politically legitimate Typically this means the stakeholders must have some level of ‘ownership’ of the process Useful Must meet policy and decision-maker needs Feedback from Assessment and Reporting to Research and Monitoring Assessment Monitoring Reporting Stakeholders Governments Private Sector Civil Society Research Action Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through the lens of the audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks What to Report? Many possible indicators Choice must be based on both Science Needs and concerns of users Users at different scales from local to global will have different needs and concerns Most relevant global concerns may not be most relevant local concerns Global Perspective Service Intrinsic & Non-Use Values Intrinsic Ecosystem Ecosystem Service & Use Service & Values Use Values Biodiversity Local Perspective Intrinsic Service What we report should emphasize relevance to multiple WSSD Goals, not just biodiversity Biodiversity goal (Reduce rate of loss of biodiversity) Ecosystems Species Genes X X X Reduce hunger X X X Reduce poverty X X X Combat disease X X X Access to clean water X X X Restore fisheries Report indicators that are: Directly derived from the goal or central components of the goal Grounded in science Viewed as legitimate by decision-makers Relevant to decision-makers at global, national, and local scales Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through lens of audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks Overarching Goal: Reduce rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010 Report aggregated ‘index’? Pro: provides focus for users, ‘catchy’ Con: adds significant subjective element into weightings; weakens scientific credibility Report by components of biodiversity? (e.g., species, ecosystems, genes) Pro: strong scientific foundation Con: adds complexity to interpretation But no different from, say, economic reporting on multiple components: GNP, unemployment, trade balance, etc What to report for species component of goal? Species extinction? Problems: Inertia and lag time Climate Change ‘Inertia’ Halting climate change or even reducing rate of climate change by 2010 is unrealistic • 1000 to 1861, N. Hemisphere, proxy data; • 1861 to 2000 Global, Instrumental; • 2000 to 2100, SRES projections Species Extinction “Inertia” Habitat Loss commits species to extinction but the extinction will take place over decades or centuries Percent Species Remaining Species committed to extinction 100 100 90 90 Z=0.15 80 80 70 70 60 60 Z=0.35 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 Lose 2/3 of habitat 0 100 87.5 75 62.5 50 37.5 25 12.5 Percent Habitat Remaining 0 100 87.5 75 62.5 50 37.5 25 12.5 Percent Habitat Remaining 0 Even if habitat loss were halted today extinction would continue for decades Extinction rates would eventually decline with time 100 Percent of Species 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 87.5 75 62.5 Time 50 37.5 25 12.5 0 If habitat loss continues over the next 10 years, the rate of species extinction will increase 100 Percent of Species Percent of Species 100 90 80 70 60 50 Lose 66% of habitat 40 30 Lose 95 % of habitat 20 10 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 87.5 75 62.5 50 37.5 25 12.5 Percent Habitat Remaining 0 100 87.5 75 62.5 50 37.5 Time 25 12.5 0 Achieving an absolute reduction in the rate of extinction is unlikely under plausible scenarios Rate of Species Loss (Extinctions per year) A reduction in the rate of increase may be more realistic Expected rate in 10 yrs Reduction in rate of increase Current Species Extinction Rate Reduction in rate – CBD Target 100 Time 87.5 75Decreasing 62.5 50 37.5 25 Area) 12.5 0 (or Habitat What to report for species component of goal? Species extinction? Problems: Inertia and lag time Grain size of extinction too large to realistically monitor on annual (decadal?) time scales Known extinctions may be poor proxy for actual extinctions. (But are good measure of loss of species many people care about.) What to report for species component of goal? Species extinction? Population sizes? Waterbird population trends Wetlands International What to report for species component of goal? Species extinction? High relevance to users Population sizes? High relevance to users Problem of representative sample Indirect measures (proxies) Habitat loss Rate of alien invasive species introductions What to report for ecosystem component of goal? Reduce rate of loss of ecosystems by 2010? Problem: what, if anything, does this mean? Better to set goal in light of CBD objectives (conserve and sustainably use…): Reduce loss and fragmentation of unmodified habitats (conservation goal) Reduce loss of ecosystem services from modified and unmodified habitats (sustainable use goal) Ecosystem Services: 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 • spiritual • recreational • aesthetic • inspirational • educational • communal • symbolic • food • fresh water • fuel wood • fiber • biochemicals • genetic resources • climate regulation • disease regulation • flood regulation • detoxification Supporting Services necessary for production of other ecosystem services. • Soil formation • Nutrient cycling • Primary production What to report for ecosystem component of goal? Reduce rate of loss of ecosystems by 2010? Problem: what, if anything, does this mean? Better to set goal in light of CBD objectives (conserve and sustainably use…): Reduce loss and fragmentation of unmodified habitats (conservation goal) High relevance to users Reduce loss of ecosystem services from modified and unmodified habitats (sustainable use goal) High relevance to users, particularly at national and local scales What to report for genetic component of goal? Loss of genetic diversity in production systems (crops, livestock, forestry) High relevance to users Indirect measures E.g., spread of elite varieties What to report? (Through the lens of the audience) Indicator Direct (2pt) Proxy (1pt) Relevance to Users Score Measurable? Species Extinction X X 3 No Population trends X X 3 ? Habitat loss X ? 1.5 X Invasive Sp X ? 1.5 ? Ecosystems Loss and Fragmentation of Habitat X X 3 X Ecosystem Services X X 3 X X 3 ? ? 1.5 X Genes Ag genetic diversity Spread of HYVs X X What to report? (Through the lens of the audience) Indicator Direct (2pt) Proxy (1pt) Relevance to Users Score Measurable? Species Extinction X X 3 No Population trends X X 3 ? Habitat loss X ? 1.5 X Invasive Sp X ? 1.5 ? Ecosystems Loss and Fragmentation of Habitat X X 3 X Ecosystem Services X X 3 X X 3 ? ? 1.5 X Genes Ag genetic diversity Spread of HYVs X X Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through lens of the audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks How to Report? Basic Considerations: Large number of existing national reporting obligations Mechanism must add more value than it adds burden at national scale Mechanism should be designed to build capacity needed to address national and local priorities Mechanism must balance political legitimacy and scientific credibility Essential to report uncertainty surrounding estimates What scale for reporting? Global National Yes, without question If we don’t, the goal won’t be taken seriously by countries or by the ‘global’ audience Ecosystem/System/Biome Would add significant value in interpreting the results Reporting Assets: National International obligations Convention Reports (CBD, CCD, Ramsar, CMS, CITES, etc.) UNEP-WCMC project on harmonization of reporting Reports on ecosystem services to FAO (food, fiber), WHO (disease incidence) and other agencies Reports to other intergovernmental forums (e.g, CSD) National and regional mechanisms State of Environment Reports; Sustainable Development reports; National Human Development Reports, State of Ecosystems, Regional Environmental Assessments, etc. Reporting Assets: International Reporting Mechanisms Clearinghouse Mechanisms Assessment Mechanisms Bilateral Assessment Mechanisms Reporting Assets: International Reporting mechanisms Global Environmental Outlook (UNEP) Global Biodiversity Outlook (CBD) UNEP-WCMC Biodiversity reports World Resources Report (UNEP, UNDP, World Bank, WRI) and EarthTrends (WRI) Human Development Report (UNDP) World Development Report (World Bank) IUCN Red Data Books IUCN Species Survival Commission Reports Living Planet Index (WWF, WCMC) Reporting Assets: International Clearinghouse Mechanisms Global Biodiversity Information Facility CBD Clearing House Mechanism IISD Compendium of Sustainable Development Indicator initiatives Reporting Assets: International Assessment Mechanisms IPCC Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Mountain Assessment Land Degradation Assessment World Water Assessment Global International Waters Assessment Global Marine Assessment FAO Plant Genetic Resource Assessment Bilateral development assistance assessment mechanisms Reporting Assets: NGO and Academia Biodiversity surveys and databases Extensive international datasets of CI, TNC, WWF, Birdlife International, Wetlands International, etc. Reporting Assets: Monitoring Monitoring and Research networks gathering long-term biodiversity information, including GTOS National programs (e.g., LTER in the US) ILTER sites; Smithsonian/UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Biodiversity Programme (forest biodiversity) CI long-term research sites Proposed “Global Life Observatory” Audience Must consider audiences at multiple scales Must consider both the formal audience and the informal audience Public outreach is essential Audience Key intergovernmental audiences: CBD WSSD follow-up, in particular CSD Biodiversity and Ecosystem related conventions (CCD, Ramsar, CMS, CITES, WHC, etc.) UN Agency Governing Councils: UNEP, UNDP, FAO, WHO, UNESCO At national and sub-national scales: Relevant ministries (more than just Envt.) Other stakeholders from private sector and civil society Frequency of reporting 1-2 years? 10 years? Many of the datasets available are too ‘noisy’ to be of value over 1-2 year time frames Miss enormous opportunity to stimulate and guide action if report only at 10 year intervals Most realistic time frame: 3-4 years? Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through lens of the audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks Guidelines for designing an effective reporting mechanism 1. Engage Users. Intended users must be engaged in the selection of what to report and must view the reporting mechanism to be ‘legitimate’ Insufficient to simply report numbers through existing mechanisms; a single intergovernmental forum could provide the entire institutional setting given multiple audiences and stakeholders and the opportunity for the reporting to influence actions in relation to multiple WSSD goals, consider a multiinstitutional governance arrangement or establish an advisory committee of other relevant intergovernmental institutions (other conventions, UN agencies, CSD etc.) Guidelines for designing an effective reporting mechanism 2. Reporting Responsibility Subsidiarity Report from lowest scale where there is value added for information or capacity-building International comparative advantage: Remote sensing for monitoring habitat change and fragmentation. FAO PGR assessments should be the basis for reporting on genetic diversity changes National comparative advantage Status and trends in ecosystem services Population and extinction trends Governments could agree to provide resources for a complete assessment of habitat change in 2005 and 2010 against 2000 baseline. Guidelines for designing an effective reporting mechanism 3. 4. Clearly state uncertainty surrounding measurements Don’t report only what can be measured 5. If a critical policy-relevant indicator is needed and data are unavailable (but could be available) make that an explicit element of the report Ensure scientific credibility Scientific ‘validation’ of the information is critical The first reporting exercises will be more like assessments than standard reporting processes An independent review mechanism should be in place to review the final report and statistics Outline Reporting Basics What to Report? Indicators viewed through lens of the audience How to Report? Guidelines for Effective Reporting Mechanisms Possible Mechanisms and Frameworks Possible mechanisms and frameworks GBO process GEO process Structure modeled on Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Multi-convention oversight CMS CCD CBD Ramsar FCCC Millennium Ecosystem Assessment UNESCO UNDP UNEP FAO WHO CGIAR ICSU IUCN GEF UNF Possible mechanisms and frameworks GBO process GEO process Millennium Ecosystem Assessment structure New mechanism