Select Committee on Environmental Audit Written Evidence


APPENDIX 7

Memorandum by WWF-UK

SUMMARY

  The findings of the Millennium Ecosystems Assessment (MA) have not been used effectively for decision making in the UK or internationally. The two main reasons for this are that:

    —  the MA has not been given the political importance internationally that its very urgent findings and recommendations warrant; and

    —  the very technical MA has never effectively been translated into clear policy guidance for political decision makers or practical application.

  There is a clear need for the MA to be made relevant to UK policy. There is a need for the UK Government to accept responsibility for the global impacts of the UK's consumption (as detailed in the Living Planet Report 2006). WWF recommends that:

    —  the MA recommendations are more fully and explicitly integrated into the UK Sustainable Development Strategy (UKSDS), and that the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) is given greater powers to oversee the implementation of the SDS across Government; and

    —  all levels of the UK Government (both national and local) accept responsibility for the global impact of the UK's consumption and, therefore, move towards "One Planet Living". Key steps include adopting ecological footprint as an indicator and supporting the use of REAP, a software tool which helps government at all levels, plan for sustainability and test the environmental impacts of proposed policy.

  Internationally, the status of the MA must be raised as a matter of urgency. There is a need for direct action on applying the MA in international processes. For example the MA could:

    —  be used in the UN reform process to input into any changes to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP);

    —  assist with commitments through the Bali Strategic plan;

    —  be used as part of the basis for a version of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for biodiversity to inform policy making; and

    —  EC and EU Member States should consider how to take the MA recommendations forward in terms of changes in policies, institutions and practices.

  Degradation of the ecosystem is one of the major global challenges facing the world and is closely interconnected with other global challenges, including global poverty, climate change, governance and conflict. These challenges are closely intertwined and cannot be viewed in isolation. Therefore, WWF recommends that strategies to address ecosystem services, must be addressed along side the other global challenges. The implications of the MA on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), for example, has to be acknowledged, and action to support natural resource management as part of poverty reduction strategies must be recognised.

INTRODUCTION

  WWF welcomes the opportunity to submit to this inquiry on the Millennium Ecosystem Report (MA). WWF works with government, business and communities in more than 90 countries around the world. Our mission is to stop the degradation of the planet's environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature.

  Every two years WWF produces the Living Planet Report. [7]The Living Planet Report presents figures on loss of biodiversity against figures on human consumption of natural resources. The graphs below, taken from the 2004 report, illustrate the significant decline in the planet's biodiversity since 1970 and reveals that humanity's impact on the planet's environment has concurrently increased to unsustainable and ever-increasing levels.



  This report leaves us in no doubt about the impact of human activity on biodiversity and the "health" of the planet. Globally we are already consuming more natural resources than the planet can produce sustainably, and creating more pollution than it can absorb. The report shows that if everyone in the world lived as we do in the UK, we would need three planets to support us.

  We in the UK are using and polluting far more than our fair share, jeopardising the ability of others in the world to meet their own and future generations' needs. Very much in line with the findings of the MA, the Living Planet Report shows that we are already seeing the consequences of our impact on the natural systems on which we depend. The focus of WWF-UK's work is to move towards "One Planet Living", that is all people living and enjoying happy, healthy lives within their fair share of the Earth's resources.

INFLUENCE OF THE MA

Question 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?

  It is WWF's view that the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment has not been given sufficient political support internationally to allow it to influence decision making at the national or international level. There has been very limited reference to the MA at international meetings, including the New York World Summit in September 2005, where there was no reference to the MA in the final outcome document.

  A commissioned assessment of the impact of the MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Survey of Initial Impacts, Walter Reid, March 2006) gives a very mixed picture of the adoption of the MA findings in the first year since it was released. It states that the first year assessment:

    "provides widespread evidence that the assessment is having an impact on the intended audiences, but the extent of that impact is very mixed, with some institutions, regions, countries, and sectors significantly influenced by the MA while others have not been influenced at all".

See Annex 1 for summary of findings.

  Details in this assessment indicate that in the UK the MA has had little direct influence on policy at either DEFRA or DFID, though, there is some evidence that it has been discussed in broad terms in both departments.

  What is clear is that it has been considered in the conservation and biodiversity sectors, but is yet to make an impact on wider national or international decision making. It is WWF's belief that the MA has to be made relevant not just directly in decisions associated with planning of natural resources, but also to ongoing national and international economic development. There has to be direct correlation between growth in economic activity and consumption of ecosystem services and the conservation of ecosystems. It is notable that the MA has had almost no impact on business or the Bretton Woods institutions, and, unfortunately, on development focused NGOs.

  Greenfacts, an organisation which aims to summarise scientific papers in layman's terms, has put together what is supposed to be a public outreach initiative and user friendly fact sheet on the MA. There is a question, however, of whether awareness of their existence and availability is widespread.

  Recommendation: There is an urgent need to translate the somewhat technical report into a powerful publicly accessible format aimed at policy makers, NGOs and multilateral decision makers. In particular, it is essential to make the findings of the MA relevant to, and input into, wider objectives on economic development and poverty reduction activities.

UK USE OF THE MA

Question 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?

Question 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?

  The main tool for addressing ecosystem services in the UK is the UK Sustainable Development Strategy. This cuts across Government departments, and requires reporting against sustainable development indicators. While the UKSDS monitors a number of indicators relevant to the MA, it does not explicitly take the MA into consideration (the UKSDS and the MA were launched at around the same time, so the MA was not available at the time of producing the UKSDS). However, the UKSDS should be reviewed in light of the MA recommendations, and be made to report against the MA on key ecosystem services for the UK.

  Again, WWF believe that, in addition to monitoring the impact on ecosystems and ecosystem assessment, there is a need for all levels of UK government (both national and local) to accept responsibility for the global impact of the UK's consumption and, therefore, move towards "One Planet Living". There is a need to put in place indicators such as ecological footprint, policies, practice and tools which support a move towards One Planet Living.

  The UK has tremendous potential to take significant steps towards "One Planet Living"[8] in the next few years. The bottom line is that we need to stabilise our ecological footprint by 2012 and then start to reduce the UK's ecological footprint to within our fair share.

  Together with the Stockholm Environment Institute, the Centre for Urban and Regional Ecology (CURE) and BiffAward, WWF has developed the first complete picture of the UK's resource use and environmental impact. The project, known as the Ecological Budget,[9] measured for the first time the UK's global—carbon dioxide emissions, materials flow and ecological footprint. A powerful software tool called the Resource and Energy Analysis Programme (REAP) has been developed which now gives decision-makers at all levels of government the ability to plan for sustainability and test the environmental impacts of proposed policy. WWF is supporting UK governments to take up this tool in order to deliver One Planet Living strategies to reduce our ecological footprint.

Recommendation: The UK Government should develop and give increased power to the Sustainable Development Commission, who oversee the implementation of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy, to allow for the implementation and monitoring of the MA recommendations.

Recommendation: the UK Government should adopt Ecological Footprint as an indicator to track the UK's efforts to move towards One Planet Living.

Recommendation: the UK national and local governments should use REAP to plan and test policy for One Planet Living.

UK EXTERNAL IMPACTS

Question 4.   Should the UK develop its own assessment report and would it be relevant to include external UK impacts?

  As mentioned, WWF believes that the UK should use ecological footprinting to assess its global impact.

  It is essential to include the external impacts of the UK activities otherwise an incomplete picture of the UK's total environmental impact will be reached. In addition, there should be more coherent policy across government in applying the MA recommendations. The examples below illustrate areas where WWF is working to address the full impact of the UK's consumption and footprint and the clear necessity for incorporating this into policy:

    —  Illegal logging: More than 70% of the wood consumed in the UK is derived from imports. Procurement by local authorities alone is believed to account for as much as a quarter of the total amount of timber the UK consumes. WWF has estimated that up to 26% of the UK's imports from six key regions could be illegal and that the UK is estimated to be the greatest importer of illegal timber in the EU.

    —  Virtual Water: The imported food we eat has significant impacts on fresh water resources in developing countries ("virtual water"). For example, one cup of coffee requires 140 litres of fresh water to produce, and one hamburger requires 2,400 litres of water. Water extracted for intensive farming has implications for access to water for small scale farming and domestic use in developing countries where water access is already scarce.

    —  UK Export Credit Guarantee Department (ECGD): The ECGD has provided billions of pounds of secured finance to carbon intensive industry sectors, such as aircraft, power generation and hydrocarbon extraction. The ECGD is currently considering increasing its footprint by investing in Shell's $20 billion Sakhalin II project in Russia, which will emit 1.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in its life time, equivalent to three years of UK national emissions. In addition Sakhalin II will significantly disrupt marine life in the area.

INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION OF THE MA

Question 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?

Question 6.   Are NGOs acting on the MA's recommendations, particularly those involved in development and poverty reduction?

Question 7.   How has business risen to the challenges identified in the MA? Has the MA been used in strategic business planning?

Question 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?

Question 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?

  WWF are actively using the MA, both as a fundamental aspect of our programme work, and as a central tool in our international policy work and lobbying. For example, the MA has been used in our lobbying on investments through the 10th European Development Fund, for a new thematic programme on environment and sustainable use of natural resources under external actions, and in the revision of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy 2006.

  There are a number of international processes which require direct application of the MA, and would require UK Government support.

Recommendations: WWF recommendations for international application include:

    —  MA could be used in the UN reform process to give input to UNEP on the technical and scientific side.

    —  It can also assist with commitments through the Bali Strategic plan and requests from developing countries for more and better information through the Bali plan.

    —  It can be used as part of the basis for an IPCC version for biodiversity to inform policy making.

    —  EC and EU Member States should consider how to take the MA recommendations forward in terms of changes in policies, institutions and practices that would mitigate some of the negative consequences of pressures on ecosystems. For example, promoting good governance and sustainable management of natural resources and ecosystem services through development cooperation assistance in partner countries and the active participation in decision making of civil society in those countries. Or, for example, supporting the development and monitoring of indicators related to the contribution of ecosystem goods and services to poverty reduction.

  There are a number of global challenges facing the world today, such as poverty and inequality, over-consumption in the north, biodiversity loss, climate change, security, population and resource scarcity. Degradation of the ecosystem is one of the major global challenges. These challenges are closely interconnected and cannot be viewed in isolation.

  WWF, therefore, recommends that strategies to address ecosystem services, must be addressed along side the other global challenges. The implications of the MA on the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, for example, has to be acknowledged, and action to support natural resource management as part of poverty reduction strategies must be recognised. This has been detailed in a recent briefing by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).[10]

Recommendation: Specifically there is a need to more closely align the MA and the Millennium Development Goals (in line with the IIED recommendations).

Recommendation: Finally, it is to be noted that a glaring omission from the MA is that it does not consider energy resources. As a key natural resource for economic development, ecosystem services supplying energy services must be included in future development of the MA.

October 2006


7   Living Planet Report 2006 is due out on 24 October 2006. Back

8   www.wwf.org.uk/oneplanetliving Back

9   www.ecologicalbudget.org.uk Back

10   Environment for the MDGs: An IIED Briefing, "Making poverty reduction irreversible: development implications of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment", Steve Bass, IIED, 2006. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 3 January 2007