APPENDIX 1
Memorandum submitted by bio SUSTAINABILITY,
a core project of the DIVERSITAS programme—University of
York
1. How successful
has the MA been in influencing decision making at UK, EU and international
levels?
DIVERSITAS has been involved with organisations
that are beginning to incorporate the MA into their thinking,
such as DEFRA, DFID, science funding bodies such as NERC and the
European Environment Agency (EEA).
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?
There are many ways of raising awareness of
the MA issues in the wider international community. One such mechanism
is the proposed International Mechanism of Scientific Expertise
in Biodiversity (IMoSEB), that DIVERSITAS is involved in. Lobbying
through this mechanism means pressure can be put on such countries.
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?
We have experienced a real shift in thinking
in UK government organisations, but this is work in progress.
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?
DEFRA is embarking on work in which DIVERSITAS
is also involved, using the ecosystem approach for the management
of natural resources.
4. Should the UK develop its own assessment
report and would it be relevant to include external UK impacts?
Yes the UK should certainly do this. In fact
the merits of doing so were discussed at a workshop of the UK
government's Global Biodiversity Sub-Committee of the Global Environmental
Change Committee, "Evaluating the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment:
main messages, knowledge gaps and policy implications".
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?
We know that the EEA have said that they will
commit to an assessment in Europe.
6. Are NGOs acting on the MA's recommendations,
particularly those involved in development and poverty reduction?
7. How has business
risen to the challenges identified in the MA? Has the MA been
used in strategic business planning?
We know that businesses are striving to address
corporate environmental responsibility, but haven't seen any evidence
to suggest that businesses are aware or using the MA.
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?
The CBD ecosystem approach is very similar to
the MA approach but we haven't seen any evidence that would show
the CBD has benefited as yet.
9. Were there any gaps or weaknesses in the
MA?
The biggest weakness of the MA was that it was
not communicated to the policy sector, governments in particular.
How should the MA be followed up?
Science needs to address the links between biodiversity
and ecosystem services and human well-being. Also, how society
values the services and how decisions can be made, whilst being
aware of the trade-offs that have to be made. The MA approach
needs to become an integral part of government policies in all
sectors. There are some examples on the horizon—IMoSEB will
be a good mechanism ensuring that scientific information on biodiversity,
like that of the MA, can be communicated directly to governments.
DFID are addressing how to build the MA into poverty alleviation
and development and there are other projects for capacity building
to take the MA recommendations forward in developing countries.
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?
Yes, there is a real danger that the mechanisms
and expertise will be lost if something more formal is not undertaken
soon.
October 2006
| 
