Download Slide 1

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