Memorandum submitted by the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
INQUIRY ISSUES
1. How successful has the MA been in influencing
decision making at UK, EU and international levels? How can we
encourage adoption of the MA response options in countries that
have been slow to do so such as the US, Brazil and India?
(a) Since the release of the full findings
of the MA late in 2005, it has begun to influence Defra's policy
thinking domestically and abroad, particularly through the increasing
use of the language of ecosystem goods and services.
UK:
(b) Defra's Natural Environment Policy (NEP)
programme is working to develop a more strategic approach to conservation
and enhancement of the natural environment. The programme is in
the early stages of formulating an ecosystems approach for England's
terrestrial ecosystems, drawing on the MA. The ecosystems approach
promises to provide a framework for looking at whole ecosystems
in policy making, to ensure that we can maintain a healthy and
resilient natural environment, now and for the future. This work
explicitly acknowledges the role of the MA in providing not simply
an evidence base for policy making, but also a new conceptual
framework through which decision making across sectors can take
place.
(c) A key part of the NEP work is the research
programme, which is designed to support policy development through
delivery of practical tools, guidelines and methodologies to enable
policy and decision makers to take account of limits, values and
cumulative pressures. The current research under this programme
includes work on the state and trends of England's terrestrial
ecosystems in terms of ecosystems services, and work focused on
the valuation of ecosystem services and the development of tools
and methodologies to make use of these valuations.
(d) The MA is also influencing future direction
for UK biodiversity policy. The role of climate change as the
dominant driver of biodiversity loss by the end of the century,
as highlighted in the MA, further strengthens the need to integrate
climate concerns into biodiversity policy making. Policy responses
include the creation of the England Biodiversity Group's (EBG)
climate change adaptation work stream to
(i) provide better guidance on impacts of
climate change;
(ii) identify research needs; and
(iii) promote adaptation of policies and
programmes within the England Biodiversity Strategy.
Priorities for 2006-10 include developing a
robust and accessible evidence base to support adaptation to climate
change impacts, including an established network for detecting
changes in biodiversity; integrating initial adaptations into
all workstreams of the strategy and establishing processes to
learn from experiences and adjust strategies accordingly;, and
raising awareness of impacts of climate change and means of adaptation
in all relevant sectors, at national, regional and local levels.
(e) The MA framework is also being used
to guide proposed research into the economic valuation and cost
effectiveness of the England Biodiversity Strategy.
(f) The UK Marine Bill acknowledges the
vital role of ecosystem services provided by the marine environment
in the adoption of an ecosystem approach to management of the
marine environment. The UK is also actively taking forward means
to realise the MA's call for the establishment of Marine Protected
areas (in UK waters and beyond) to fulfil its obligation under
the Habitats Directive. There are currently 146 marine protected
areas in UK inshore waters, which includes 78 Special Protection
Areas for birds, 65 marine Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)
and three statutory marine nature reserves. These 146 sites are
primarily coastal sites with a marine element. Defra will also
be consulting next year on a first tranche of eight Special Areas
of Conservation in UK offshore waters. We are continuing to survey
potential areas for SACs and by the end of 2006 expect to have
collected important data to assess these areas against the SAC
selection criteria.
EU:
(g) Within the EU, the findings of the MA
have been used to inform the development of the recent Biodiversity
Communication from the European Commission, after consultation
with Member States. The Communication highlights some of the key
findings of the MA while making the case for the urgent need to
conserve and use biodiversity sustainably. The Action Plan contained
in the Communication calls on the EU (and Member States) to contribute
to the planned 2007 evaluation of the MA as part of the commitment
to strengthening the knowledge base for biodiversity (this call
was also made by CBD COP8—see below).
INTERNATIONAL
(h) The UK continues to lobby through numerous
multilateral fora for the consideration, adoption and use of the
MAs findings and methodologies:
— The UK has pressed the importance
of Marine Protected areas and for an end to the detrimental effects
of bottom trawling on sensitive ecosystems on the high seas, to
support our positions at the UN General Assembly fisheries and
marine discussions.
— The MA's findings and recommendations
were used to inform UK positions at the UN Commission on Sustainable
Development (CSD), the UN Environment Programme Governing Council
and during the Millennium Review Summit in 2005.
— Through substantial UK lobbying,
the Convention on Biological Diversity's eighth Conference of
the Parties (CBD COP8) explicitly acknowledged the importance
of the MA and agreed to integrate its findings into future review
of its work programmes. The COP also encouraged the use of the
MA methodologies and called for more research globally into some
of the issues covered by the MA (such as monitoring systems, biodiversity
valuation and ecosystem function and ecosystem services).
(j) These global processes are the key means
whereby the UK can promote the consideration and implementation
of the MAs findings internationally.
(k) On behalf of the UK Inter-Ministerial
Group on Biodiversity, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee
(JNCC) has been asked by Ministers to inform the current HMG approach
to international biodiversity. JNCC are using the MA to educate
their deliberations on behalf of the group.
(m) The Global Biodiversity Sub Committee
of the Global Environmental Change Committee held a workshop on
the MA in February 2006 attended by UK participants in the Assessment
and a wide range of science leaders and policy makers (Also see
answer to Q9).
(n) The MA evidence base has been used by
Defra in our discussions with HM Treasury on Natural Resource
Protection, as part of our contribution to the CSR07.
2. To what extent have MA findings and processes
been incorporated into UK departments? How aware are departments
of the importance of the MA? What steps are being taken to ensure
that the findings of the MA are being considered and, where relevant,
acted upon in the departments? Is there any evidence of real change
in government as an outcome of the MA?
(a) Defra is keen to promote the findings
of the MA. This awareness and promotion extends up to Ministerial
level.
(b) Defra and the Joint Nature Conservation
Committee, on behalf of the Global Environment Change Committee—Global
Biodiversity Sub-Committee (GECC-GBSC), organised an event in
February 2006 aimed at developing an overview of the strengths
and weaknesses of the MA (see Q9 below). Following on from this
workshop, government departments and agencies are currently taking
part in a mapping exercise to assess current UK action in response
to the MA.
(c) The increasing use of the language of
ecosystem services and their importance to the world's poor is
a sure sign of the integration of the MA's findings into government,
for example:
— The Secretary of State's recent letter
to Tony Blair covering Defra's priorities includes reference the
"services that ecosystems provide";
— Barry Gardiner MP, Minister for Biodiversity
has made speeches promoting the MA's messages on a number of occasions,
including a speech to the World Bank; and to business leaders.
(c) Defra will continue to promote the MA
messages to key stakeholders, in particular to groups identified
in our WSSD Delivery Plan for international biodiversity http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/international/wssd/documents/biodiversity-2006.pdf
. This will ensure the integration of the MA into other sectors:
— Within the Development community,
Defra will advise on a joint DFID/NERC research program on ecosystem
services and their role in poverty alleviation.
— Defra will also continue to work
with the business community to ensure they are aware of the findings
of the MA and how these influence their bottom line.
— Defra will continue to work with
the scientific community (at home and abroad) to assess the continued
decline in biodiversity, and provide support for global efforts
to fill these information gaps.
3. How has the MA been used to ensure that
there is adequate policy coherence, placing adequate weight on
non-financial impacts and environmental limits in policies? Are
the issues raised in the MA adequately addressed by UK policy
appraisal through Regulatory Impact Assessments? Can departments
document examples where the MA has resulted in a change in the
preferred policy option to one which is more sustainable?
(a) The Defra NEP research programme has
funded a number of scoping studies including one on environmental
limits. This study looked at how limits are used and applied,
and how they can be used in decision-making. This is being developed,
along with the evidence on valuation and cumulative pressures
in the second stage of the NEP research programme, through projects
looking at the state and trends of England's ecosystems, and case
studies to develop tools and methodologies to deliver an ecosystem-based
approach—including limit setting. The studies will run over
a nine to 18 month time period.
(b) Defra intends that the tools and methodologies
developed through the case studies will eventually be able to
inform methods of cost and benefit analysis of the natural environment.
However this is a long-term agenda and the current round of research
studies are an initial step. Further work on valuation of ecosystem
services is also ongoing. This should contribute towards the development
of a methodology for aggregating and disaggregating values for
the natural environment across ecosystem services to give values
for whole ecosystems and across ecosystems to give values for
English regions or nationally for England.
(c) Internationally, Defra continues to
press for a change to a more sustainable policy in relation to
marine biodiversity, where we are increasingly lobbying for the
establishment of marine protected areas on the high seas, and
an end to bottom trawling on sensitive ecosystems.
4. Should the UK develop its own assessment
report and would it be relevant to include external UK impacts?
(a) Defra have commissioned the NEP phase
II project (mentioned in 3 above) which is looking at the state
and trends of England's terrestrial ecosystems. While this is
not a "full" MA for the UK, it is a comprehensive assessment
of the current status and contractors have been asked to consider
the use of the MA conceptual framework in their work. There are
numerous other sectoral assessments already undertaken by Defra,
the Devolved Administrations and agencies, though these are not
currently brought together within a single coherent framework.
(b) The Secretary of State has highlighted
in his letter to the Prime Minister on Defra priorities a move
towards "one planet living"—a concept which involves
taking account of the effects of UK actions and consumption on
natural resources at home and abroad. Defra has recently completed
an evaluation of the evidence base for assessing the impacts on
international biodiversity from UK consumption of five key commodities.
Our SCP Research programme will continue to build a robust evidence
base to inform our policy on how to establish a more sustainable
approach to global natural resource use.
5. How have international institutions adopted
the findings and processes of the MA? Why has the World Bank been
slow to respond to the MA? How should the findings of the MA be
incorporated into the World Bank's work?
(a) The World Bank played a major role in
the preparation of the MA. Dr Robert Watson, the World Bank's
Chief Scientist was co-chair of the Board of the MA. The World
Bank has recently published: Where is the Wealth of Nations? which
embodies values for economic services to adjust macroeconomic
indicators for different countries.
(b) Dr Watson continues to play a key role
in the working committee derived from the MA's oversight board,
which administers the Zayed Prize funds. This Prize was awarded
collectively to the MA team for their efforts; and the associated
funds in turn are being used to support a number of follow up
conferences (organised through IUCN) and a project running at
UNEP- World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) to develop a
handbook for carrying out future ecosystem assessments.
6. Are NGOs acting on the MA's recommendations,
particularly those involved in development and poverty reduction?
(a) The Committee will no doubt be taking
evidence from NGOs. Defra is aware of a number of NGOs who have
used the MA in their work. NGOs were represented at the GECC-GBSC
workshop on the MA in February 2006.
7. How has business risen to the challenges
identified in the MA? Has the MA been used in strategic business
planning?
(a) Businesses are increasingly realising
the importance of the MAs findings for their operations. Business
representatives contributed to the MA business Synthesis report:
Opportunities and Challenges for Business and Industry.
The UK has championed involvement with the business community
in addressing the loss of global biodiversity, and this priority
is highlighted in our WSSD Delivery Plan for international biodiversity
(http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/international/wssd/documents/biodiversity-2006.pdf).
(b) At the recent Convention on Biological
Diversity Conference of the Parties (CBD COP8) Jim Knight MP (the
then Minister for Biodiversity) hosted a breakfast for business
and government leaders attended by 300 guests. At this event he
emphasised the UK's support for business engagement. His speech
explicitly recognised the role business can play in reducing biodiversity
loss. He also stressed the increasing recognition by companies
of the business case for managing their impacts on biodiversity
as part of their management of risks to their companies' operations,
performance and reputation.
8. How useful was the MA in addressing the
assessment needs of a number of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
such as the Convention on Biological Diversity?
(a) The Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD) held a substantive discussion on the implications of the
MA for the Convention at COP8 in March 2006. The UK was a leading
contributor in these discussions, and our support for the MA process
and findings were echoed in the final decision (COP VIII/31) from
the meeting; including:
— Agreement to use the findings of
the MA as a contribution to future reviews of the CBD's programmes
of work.
— A call for further research into
areas promoted and pioneered by the MA (such as ecosystem services,
valuation of biodiversity etc).
— An instruction to the CBD secretariat
to contribute to the planned 2007 review of the MA.
— Encouragement of Parties to use the
MA conceptual framework and methodologies to conduct national
and other sub-global assessments of the state of biodiversity.
— A reiteration of the main drivers
of biodiversity loss (as highlighted in the MA) and a call for
action to address these drivers within the Convention.
— Agreement to consider outcomes
from relevant processes (including IMoSEB) in assessing the need
for another integrated assessment of biodiversity and ecosystems
and the availability of scientific advice on biodiversity at COP9.
(b) The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
of International Importance received a special synthesis report
from the MA on "Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Wetlands
and Water". A summary of this report was presented during
the 9th Ramsar COP held in Uganda in November 2005. The Final
conference Report included 14 "key messages" concerning
the key findings of the MA for the Ramsar Convention and its future
implementation. The findings of the MA were also referred to and
endorsed in a number of documents and Resolutions agreed by the
COP, including:
— A Conceptual Framework for the wise
use of wetlands and the maintenance of their ecological character
(Resolution IX.1 Annex A). The MA framework was used by the Ramsar
Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) to develop and update
wetland wise use terminology.
— The STRP work programme for 2006-08
(Resolution IX.2) includes actions to make use of MA findings.
— The Resolution on wetlands and poverty
reduction (Resolution IX.14) strongly supported by the UK referred
to the findings of the MA and in particular the report on ecosystems
and human well-being to encourage all parties to take action to
contribute to poverty reduction.
9. Were there any gaps or weaknesses in the
MA? How should the MA be followed up? Are the mechanisms and expertise
which were developed to create the MA now being lost due to a
lack of confirmation of a formal follow up procedure?
(a) Defra and the Joint Nature Conservation
Committee (JNCC), under the auspices of the Global Environmental
Change Committee's Global Biodiversity Sub-Committee (GECC-GBSC),
held an event in February 2006 aimed at developing an overview
of the strengths and weaknesses of the MA. This included an evaluation
of those elements that could be used to support policy development;
those elements that should be approached more cautiously; and
the identification of priority gaps in the science to be addressed.
(b) This workshop identified gaps in the
coverage and methodologies of the MA. Some identified gaps with
regard to biodiversity policy are in the coverage of taxonomic
groups (the MA scenarios relied heavily on models of terrestrial
plant diversity), generally weaker treatment of marine biodiversity
and scenarios that do not relate well to the more immediate context
of decision making. Further information on identified gaps is
available at http://www.ukgecc.org/dvl-Biodiversity-MEA.htm
(c) The MA Board is still active in international
circles, and its members continue to promote the findings of the
MA in various fora.
(d) Individual countries are also undertaking
follow up work (for example, the Southern Africa sub-Global assessment).
(e) The MA Board, at its final meeting,
recognized that a better appreciation of the impacts of the MA
would only be possible a few years after the MA findings were
released The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) will also be undertaking
a review of the MA, and the CBD COP8 has tasked the CBD Secretariat
with contributing to this planned UNEP evaluation.
(f) The UK is also contributing to the current
consultation on the need for an international mechanism that might
support anongoing global assessment of biodiversity. This consultation
on IMoSEB (International Mechanism on Scientific Expertise on
Biodiversity) is reviewing the gaps in the provision of scientific
advice on biodiversity to decision makers. The outcomes of this
consultation should reveal whether a follow-up assessment of the
state of biodiversity would be considered relevant, timely and
valuable to decision makers.
(g) Meanwhile, Defra continues to promote
efforts to fill identified gaps in biodiversity knowledge, for
example, through our work to survey the UK marine environment
and through support for CBD process to develop indicators of status
and trends to measure progress towards the 2010 biodiversity target.
October 2006
| 
