Post on 12-Jan-2016
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Overview of Findings
What is the 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
MA Timeline
UN Launch
Launch and design
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Review process
Board approval
Release of Assessment
Reports
Release of Conceptual
Framework report
Core assessment work
Millennium Assessment (Pages end
to end)Eiffel Tower
Feet
2000
1000
RegulatingBenefits obtained from regulation of
ecosystem processes
CulturalNon-material benefits from ecosystems
ProvisioningGoods produced or
provided by ecosystems
What was unique?
Ecosystem services
Photo credits (left to right, top to bottom): Purdue University, WomenAid.org, LSUP, NASA, unknown, CEH Wallingford, unknown, W. Reid, Staffan Widstrand
Provisioning Services
Food Crops Livestock Capture Fisheries Aquaculture Wild Foods
Fiber Timber Cotton, hemp, silk Wood Fuel
Genetic resources
Biochemicals
Freshwater
Goods produced or provided by ecosystems
Photo credit (top): Tran Thi Hoa (World Bank),
Regulating Services
Air Quality Regulation
Climate Regulation Global (CO2 sequestration)
Regional and local
Erosion regulation
Water purification
Disease regulation
Pest regulation
Pollination
Natural Hazard regulation
Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem processes
Cultural Services
Spiritual and Religious Values
Knowledge Systems
Educational values
Inspiration
Aesthetic Values
Social Relations
Sense of Place
Recreation and Ecotourism
Non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems
Photo credits ( top to bottom): W. Reid, Mary Frost, Staffan Widstrand, unknown.
Local Conceptual Framework
Cabecar view of ecosystems
Earth is a circle surrounded by sea. There is a balance between upper and lower worlds
Habitat as a conic house
Special areas and places protected by guardians that regulate access and use of resources
Each living entity is a seed that deserves respect. Human beings are maize seeds
Cabecar view of ecosystems
MA view of ecosystems
Human Wellbeing and
Poverty Reduction
Indirect DriversOf Change
Direct DriversOf Change
Life on Earth:Biodiversity
Ecosystem Services
Bridging Knowledge Systems?
Core Questions
1. What is the rate and scale of ecosystem change?
2. What are the consequences of ecosystem change for the services provided by ecosystems and for human-well being?
3. How might ecosystems and their services change over the next 50 years?
4. What options exist to conserve ecosystems and enhance their contributions to human well-being?
Main Finding
Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.
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
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100
Year
$1 trillion in 1900
$10 trillion in 1967
$52 trillion in 2003
World GDP (trillion 1990 dollars)
Source: DeLong 1998
Temperate Grasslands & Woodlands
Temperate Broadleaf Forest
Tropical Dry Forest
Tropical Grasslands
Tropical Coniferous Forest
Mediterranean Forests
Tropical Moist Forest
0 50 100
Percent of habitat (biome) remaining
Habitat Loss to 1990
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
20% of the world’s coral reefs were lost and more than 20% degraded
35% of mangrove area has been lost in the last several decades
Amount of water in reservoirs quadrupled since 1960
Scale of Change
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1875 1925 1975 2025
Fossil Fuels
Agroecosystems
Fertilizer
Total Human Additions
Natural Sources
Teragrams of Nitrogen per Year
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Percent Increase in Nitrogen Flows in Rivers
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone
Source: NOAA
280
300
320
340
360
380
400
1954 1969 1983 1998 2012
CO2 Concentration (ppm)
Source: Keeling and Whorf, 2005.
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
Global Surface Temperature (oC)Relative to 1890-1900 mean
Source: Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
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
Change in Species Diversity
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
Fossil Recent Future
Number per Thousand Species
Extinctions(per thousand years)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1790-1819 1820-1849 1850-1879 1880-1909 1910-1939 1940-1969 1970-19991790 1900 2000
Number of Species
Homogenization(e.g. growth in marine species
introductions)
North America
Europe100 to 1000-fold increase
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Main Findings
1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.
2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals. Degradation of many ecosystem
services Increased risk of abrupt changes in
ecosystems Growing harm to poor people
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
The Balance Sheet
Crops Status: Enhanced
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1961 1971 1981 1991 2001
Ind
ex
(1
96
1 =
10
0)
Food Production Food Production per Capita Food Price
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Capture Fisheries Status: Degraded
Photo Credit (left): UNEP
Source: FAO 2000
Status of Marine Fish Stocks
Underexploited, 4%
Moderately Exploited, 21%
Fully Exploited, 47%
Overexploited, 28%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Freshwater Status: Degraded
15–35% of Irrigation Withdrawals Unsustainable (low to medium certainty)
Natural Hazard Regulation Status: Degraded
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s
Flood events per decade
Asia Americas Africa Europe
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Sources Sinks
Land Use
Fossil FuelAtmosphere
Oceans
Terrestrial
Climate Regulation (Global) Status: Enhanced
Peta grams carbon
Sources and Sinks of Carbon over Past Two Centuries
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Terrestrial ecosystems have been net carbon sink since mid-1990s, but previously were net carbon source
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Sources Sinks
Land Use
Fossil FuelAtmosphere
Oceans
Terrestrial
Gigatons carbon per year
Sources and Sinks of Carbon in 1990s
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Climate Regulation (Global) Status: Enhanced
Increased likelihood of abrupt changes(established but incomplete evidence)
• Fisheries collapse • Eutrophication• Coral reef regime shifts• Disease emergence • Species introductions• Regional climate change
Atlantic Cod off Newfoundland
Economic and health costs of degradation can be substantial
Cost of damage of UK agriculture to other ecosystem services
Cost of collapse of the cod fishery in Canada
Introduction of Zebra mussels into aquatic ecosystems in the US
$2.6 billion (10% of farm receipts)
$2 billion in income support and retraining; loss of tens of thousands of jobs
$100 million annual costs to power industry
Cultural Cultural
Regulating Regulating
Provisioning Provisioning
Provisioning services are being enhanced at the cost of regulating & cultural services
Provisioning Provisioning
Regulating Regulating
Cultural Cultural
CropsLivestockAquacultureCarbon sequestration
Capture fisheriesWild foodsWood fuelGenetic resourcesBiochemicalsFresh WaterAir quality regulationRegional & local climate
regulationErosion regulationWater purificationPest regulationPollinationNatural Hazard
regulationSpiritual & religious Aesthetic values
TimberFiberWater regulationDisease regulationRecreation & ecotourism
Enhanced Degraded Mixed
Trade-offs Among Services
Mangrove ecosystem
shrimpshrimp
housinghousing
cropscrops
Mangrove Services:
• nursery and adult fishery habitat
• fuelwood & timber
• carbon sequestration
• traps sediment• detoxifies
pollutants• protection from
erosion & disaster
Trade-offs among ecosystem services
Croatia
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Timber andfuelwood
Grazing
NTFPs
Recreation andhunting
Watershedprotection
Carbonsequestration
Passive usevalues
Italy
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Timber andfuelwood
Grazing
NTFPs
Recreation andhunting
Watershedprotection
Carbonsequestration
Passive usevalues
Economic Value ($ per hectare)Economic Value ($ per hectare)
Forests in Italy Forests in Croatia
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Economic value of non-marketed services can be high
Photo: W. Reid
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
Impact on Poor and Marginalized People
Poor people are most dependent on ecosystem services and most vulnerable to degradation of the services
Photo credit: Uittapron Juntawonsup/UNEP
• Per capita food production declining in sub-Saharan Africa• Number of undernourished people worldwide increasing• Water scarcity affects 1 in every 3 people worldwide• 1.1 billion people lack access to improved water supply• Half the developing country urban population suffers from diseases
associated with water and sanitation• Malaria responsible for 11% of the burden of disease in Africa
Impact on Poor and Marginalized People
Critical concern – drylands
• 40% of land surface and more than 2 billion inhabitants
• Lowest levels of human well-being
• 10-20% of drylands degraded
• Only 8% of renewable water supply
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Drylands Mountain Coastal Cultivated Forests Island
Per
cen
t p
op
ula
tio
n g
row
th (
1990
-200
0)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Net
pri
mar
y p
rod
uct
ivit
y (k
g/s
q m
/yr)
%pop growth NPP
Dryland Systems: Highest population growth in 1990’s
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Main Findings
1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.
2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals.
3. Degradation of ecosystems could grow worse but can be reversed.
Order from Strength
Adapting Mosaic
Global Orchestration
TechnoGarden
Globalization Regionalization
World DevelopmentE
nvi
ron
men
tal
Man
agem
ent
Pro
activ
e
R
eact
ive
MA Scenarios
Scenario Storylines
Global Orchestration Globally connected society that focuses on global trade and economic liberalization and takes a reactive approach to ecosystem problems but that also takes strong steps to reduce poverty and inequality and to invest in public goods such as infrastructure and education.
Order from Strength Regionalized and fragmented world, concerned with security and protection, emphasizing primarily regional markets, paying little attention to public goods, and taking a reactive approach to ecosystem problems.
Scenario Storylines
Adapting Mosaic Regional watershed-scale ecosystems are the focus of political and economic activity. Local institutions are strengthened and local ecosystem management strategies are common; societies develop a strongly proactive approach to the management of ecosystems.
TechnoGarden Globally connected world relying strongly on environmentally sound technology, using highly managed, often engineered, ecosystems to deliver ecosystem services, and taking a proactive approach to the management of ecosystems in an effort to avoid problems.
Trends in Drivers
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1970 1990 2010 2030 2050
Million sq. km
Developing regions
Industrialized regions
Change in Agricultural Land Under MA Scenarios
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Temperate Broadleaf Forest
Tropical Dry Forest
Tropical Grasslands
Tropical Coniferous Forest
Mediterranean Forests
Tropical Moist Forest
0 50 100
Percent of habitat (biome) remaining
Habitat Loss to 1990Habitat Loss to 2050 under MA Scenarios
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Temperate Grasslands & Woodlands
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1875 1925 1975 2025
Fossil Fuels
Agroecosystems
Fertilizer
Total Human Additions
Natural Sources
Teragrams of Nitrogen per Year
Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100
Temperature Change (oC) from 1990
A: Observations, Northern Hemisphere, Proxy data
B: Global Instrumental Observations
C: IPCC 2001 Scenario Projections (SRES)
A B C
1.5 – 5.7 oC
Source: IPCC 2001
MA Scenarios
100
50
0
Percent Change by 2050
Food Demand
70-85%
Water Withdrawal
30-85%
Species Loss
10-15% (low certainty)
Global Orchestration
Lower population Lower habitat loss Higher economic growth Higher GHG emissions
Global, Reactive environmental policies
Population Scenarios
TechnoGarden
Best GHG Best Nitrogen Best Water Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration Reliability of ecosystem services decreased, risks
increased New problems emerge from technologies
Global, Proactive environmental policies
Adapting Mosaic
Best GHG Best Nitrogen Best Water Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration Reliability of ecosystem services decreased, risks
increased New problems emerge from technologies
Regionalized, Proactive environmental policies
Order from Strength
Worst across the board (except GHG/Climate due to slower economic growth)
Slower economic growth than Global Orchestration
Regionalized, Reactive environmental policies
Some services improved in three of the four MA scenarios
Examples: Freshwater Water regulation Erosion control Water purification Storm protection Aesthetic values Recreation
Degradation of many services can be reversed by 2050
In three of the four MA scenarios, many currently degraded ecosystem services were enhanced by 2050
But the actions needed are significant and not underway
Investments in public goods (e.g., education) and poverty reduction
Elimination of trade barriers and distorting subsidies
Use of active adaptive management Investment in education Investment in new technologies Payments for ecosystem services
Main Findings
1. Humans have radically altered ecosystems in last 50 years.
2. Changes have brought gains but at growing costs that threaten achievement of development goals.
3. Degradation of ecosystems could grow worse but can be reversed.
4. Workable solutions will require significant changes in policy
Promising Options:Change the economic incentivesProblem can’t be solved so long as ecosystem services are treated as free and limitless• Measure ecosystem service values• Incorporate into cost-benefit
analyses
Agricultural and fisheries production subsidies cause ecosystem service degradation.
Annual subsidy to agricultural in industrialized countries: $324 billion annually (1/3 of global value)
Annual subsidy to fisheries in industrialized countries $6.2 billion (20% of global value)
Opportunity to shift subsidies to payments for ecosystem services
Costa Rica Payments for Ecosystem Services
Downstream Users benefit from protection of upstream ecosystem services
Pay upstream landowners to maintain forest cover on their land
$
Program established 1997
By 2001: 280,000 ha enrolled at cost of $30 million
Typical payments: $35 to $45 per hectare
Payments for Ecosystem Services
Costa Rica Land owners are paid for new plantations, sustainable
logging, and forest conservation. Funded in part by tax on energy use.
Mexico Pays for forest conservation in critical watersheds using
revenue from water charges.Colombia
Water users in the Cauca Valley pay for conservation in their watersheds.
Ecuador Quito funds from the water utility and the electric power
company pay for conservation in the city watershed
Promising Options:Change the economic incentives
Market mechanisms may sometimes be useful (e.g. potential to reduce nutrient releases and carbon emissions)
Promising Options:Change the economic incentives
Rapid growth of Carbon market
Ecosystem Marketplace: Online information on ecosystem service markets and payments for services
Development planning and national development strategies could benefit from the incorporation of ecosystem services MDG-Based Poverty Reduction
Strategies Capacity building for national
planning and assessments
Promising Options:Policy, Planning & Management
Southern Africa MA SynthesisSource: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment - SAfMA
Promising Options:Technologies
Sustainable Agricultural Intensification
Energy Technologies Significant harm if global
temperature increases 2o C0
1
2
3
4
5
1961 Crop Area 2004 Crop Area 2004 Area at1961 Yield
Total SuitableLand
Billion Hectares
Growth in Cropland 1961 to 2004
Photo credit: Jorgen Schytte/Peter Arnold, Inc.
Promising Options:Individual Behavior
Public education
Information that can influence choices Certification systems Value of ecosystem
services
Photo credit: W. Reid
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
1. Growing Costs and Risks Ecosystem services that are inexpensive or
freely available today will cease to be available or become more costly
· E.g., water, fish, storm protection, local climate, flood control
Growing risks associated with ecosystem changes
· Disease emergence, resource collapse, etc. · Businesses cannot assume there will be ample
warning of changes in the availability of key ecosystem services
· Businesses cannot assume their past responses to changes will be successful in the future.
Business bottom line
2. Changes to Framework Conditions Customer preferences Risks of regulatory
action Investor pressure Public campaigns Cost of capital Cost of insurance Employee well-being
Business bottom line
3. New Business Opportunities New markets
· E.g., Carbon market
New incentives· E.g., payments for
ecosystem services
New businesses· E.g., ecosystem
restoration
New Technologies
Company Ecosystem Service Audit
Undertake an ‘ecosystem service 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
Washington Post, March 30, 2005
Detroit Free Press, April 4 2005
Melbourne, Australia, March 30, 2005
“...hmmpf... an ecosystem? what's that exactly?”
Front page Le Monde April 5, 2005