Bridging Scales and Epistemologies in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

1
Bridging Scales and Epistemologies in the
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

• Alexandria, Egypt March 17-20, 2004
• Walter V. Reid
• Director
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

2
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

• Seeks to dramatically increase the information
  available for resources managers and policymakers
  to better manage the environment.
• Established in response to
• The growing challenge of balancing multiple
  demands on the environment, e.g.
• Food
• Water
• Biodiversity
• Recreation
• Urban development
• The vast scale of the changes now being made in
  global ecosystems
• Land cover, nitrogen flows, climate change etc.

3
Science Assessment

• A social process to bring the findings of science
  to bear on the needs of decision-makers

4

• Science Assessment
• Authoritative
• Policy relevant, not policy prescriptive
• Stakeholders feel ownership in process and
  findings
• Reflect consensus of science (while identifying
  areas of scientific disagreement)

5
Who established the assessment?

• UN Secretary General Kofi Annan called for the
  Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in his 2000
  Report to the UN General assembly
• Parties to four conventions took decisions
  establishing the MA as one source of assessment
  input.
• Convention on Biological Diversity
• Convention to Combat Desertification
• Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar)
• Convention on Migratory Species
• UN Secretary General launched the MA in June 2001

6
Who governs the assessment?

• Board represents Users of the MA findings
• Conventions
• CBD, UNCCD, UNFCCC, Ramsar, CMS
• UN Agencies
• UNEP, UNDP, FAO, WHO, UNESCO
• Donors
• GEF, UN Foundation
• International science organizations
• CGIAR, ICSU, IUCN
• At large representation
• Private sector
• NGOs
• Scientists
• indigenous people

7
Ecosystem Services The benefits people obtain
from ecosystems

• Regulating
• Benefits obtained from regulation of ecosystem
  processes
• climate regulation
• disease regulation
• flood regulation

Provisioning Goods produced or provided by
ecosystems food fresh water fuel wood
genetic resources
Cultural Non-material benefits from ecosystems
spiritual recreational aesthetic
inspirational educational
Supporting Services necessary for production of
other ecosystem services Soil formation
Nutrient cycling Primary production
8
Consequences of Ecosystem Change for Human
Well-being
Ecosystem Services
Constituents of Well-being
9
MA Framework
Human Wellbeing and Poverty Reduction
Indirect Drivers Of Change
Direct Drivers Of Change
Life on Earth Biodiversity
Ecosystem Services
10
MA Framework

• Human Wellbeing and
• Poverty Reduction
• Material minimum for a good life
• Health
• Good Social Relations
• Security
• Freedom and Choice

• Indirect Drivers of Change
• Demographic
• Economic (globalization, trade, market and policy
  framework)
• Sociopolitical (governance and institutional
  framework)
• Science and Technology
• Cultural and Religious

• Direct Drivers of Change
• Changes in land use or land cover
• Species introductions or removals
• Technology adaptation and use
• External inputs (e.g., irrigation, fertilizer
  use, pest control)
• Harvest and Resource Consumption
• Climate Change
• Natural physical and biological drivers (e.g.,
  volcanoes, evolution)

11
Framework Examines Multiple Drivers as they
Influence Ecosystems and Human Well-being
Driver
Response
Human Impact
12
Framework allows examination of trade-offs among
services
Water availability
Freshwater supply and demand
Food supply and demand
Water use and nutrient loss
Erosion andwater flow
Land transformation
Hydrologic CO2 and temperature changes
N, CH4, N20 emissions
Forest product supply and demand
Precipitation temperature
Climatechange
Habitat loss
Habitat loss
Loss and fragmentation of habitat
Loss of crop genetic diversity
Reduced resilience to change
Habitat change
Change in transpiration albedo
Biodiversityloss
Source Ayensu et al. 1999. Science
286685-686.
13
Timeline
14
MA Products
MA Conceptual Framework
2003
Assessment Reports
2005
Summary for Decision-makers
Synthesis Reports
15
MA Structure
Committees Executive Budget Communications
MA Board
Review Board Chairs
Assessment PanelWorking Group Chairs
Support Functions Director, Administration,
Logistics, Data Management
Outreach Engagement
Chapter Review Editors
Global Assessment Working Groups
16
MA Working Groups

• 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?

• 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?

17
MA includes global, regional, national, and local
assessments
18
Regional and National Assessments
Global Assessment
Users
Regional Development Banks, etc.
Regional
National Government
National
Local Community
Local
19
MA is a Multi-scale Assessmente.g., Southern
Africa Millennium Assessment
SADC region
3 drainage basins
Local assessments
Zambezi
Gariep
Source Reyers, B., SAfMA Lessons Learned
(Panama, June 2002)
20
Sub-global Assessments also provide a means of
incorporating indigenous and traditional knowledge

• 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

21
MA seeks to incorporate indigenous knowledge
Cabecar view of ecosystems
MA view of ecosystems
22
MA Sponsors
Financial contributions ( 17 million)
In-kind contributions ( 6 million)

• Sponsors
• Global Environment Facility
• United Nations Foundation
• Packard Foundation
• World Bank
• United Nations Environment Program
• Other Donors
• Government of Norway
• Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
• Rockefeller Foundation
• NASA
• ICSU
• Swedish International Biodiversity Programme
• Christensen Fund

• Norway
• China
• India
• Japan
• Germany
• Netherlands
• United States (NASA, USGS, ORNL, USDA)
• European Commission
• FAO, UNDP, WHO, UNESCO, UNEP
• ICRAF, ICLARM
• Numerous other countries, NGOs, Universities and
  other institutions are supporting travel costs of
  experts

23
Visit the New MA Website

• www.millenniumassessment.org