1. Living with Environmental Change Managing Ecosystem Services
Robert Watson
Chief Scientific Advisor
Defra
Fresh Seminar
Nottingham University
October 24, 2007

2. Context UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
UK Sustainable Development Strategy
New Public Sector Agreement framework for CSR07 and other government initiatives

3. Indirect Drivers of Change Direct Drivers of Change
MA Framework
Human Well-being and
Poverty Reduction
Basic material for a good life
Health
Good Social Relations
Security
Freedom of choice and action
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
Indirect
Ecosystem
Services
Human
Well-being
Direct Drivers of Change
Changes in land use
Species introduction or removal
Technology adaptation and use
External inputs (e.g., irrigation)
Resource consumption
Climate change
Natural physical and biological drivers (e.g., volcanoes)

4. Ecosystem services
Taken and adapted from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

5. Ecosystem Services
Everyone in the world depends on nature and ecosystem services to provide the conditions for a decent, healthy, and secure life

6. Converting an ecosystem means losing
some services and gaining others – e.g.,
A mangrove ecosystem:
housing
shrimp
A forest into agricultural lands; a wetland into a shopping mall or airport;
Provides nursery and adult habitat ,
Seafood, fuelwood, & timber;
traps sediment; detoxifies pollutants;
protects coastline from erosion & disaster
crops

7. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Two thirds of ecosystem services in decline globally
Degradation set to worsen and a barrier to achieving Millennium Development Goals
Actions needed by governments and the private sector

8. Direct drivers growing in intensity
Most direct drivers of degradation in ecosystem services remain constant or are growing in intensity in most ecosystems

9. a

10. Changes to ecosystems have provided substantial benefits
Food production has more than doubled since 1960
Food production per capita has grown
Food price has fallen
Over the past 40 years, globally, intensification of cultivated systems has been the primary source (almost 80%) of increased output. But some countries, predominantly found in Sub-Saharan Africa, have had persistently low levels of productivity, and continue to rely on expansion of cultivated area. in sub-Saharan Africa, however, yield increases accounted for only 34% of growth in production

11. Key Problems
Among the outstanding problems identified by this assessment are the dire state of many of the world’s fish stocks; the intense vulnerability of the 2 billion people living in dry regions to the loss of ecosystem services, including water supply; and the growing threat to ecosystems from climate change and nutrient pollution.

12. Changes in direct drivers
Changes in crop land and forest area under MA Scenarios
Crop Land
Forest Area

13. What can we do about it?
Change the economic background to decision-making
Make sure the value of all ecosystem services, not just those bought and sold in the market, are taken into account when making decisions
Remove subsidies to agriculture, fisheries, and energy that cause harm to people and the environment
Introduce payments to landowners in return for managing their lands in ways that protect ecosystem services, such as water quality and carbon storage, that are of value to society
Establish market mechanisms to reduce nutrient releases and carbon emissions in the most cost-effective way

14. What can we do about it? Improve policy, planning, and management
Integrate decision-making between different departments and sectors, as well as international institutions, to ensure that policies are focused on protection of ecosystems
Include sound management of ecosystem services in all regional planning decisions and in the poverty reduction strategies being prepared by many developing countries
Empower marginalized groups to influence decisions affecting ecosystem services, and recognize in law local communities’ ownership of natural resources
Establish additional protected areas, particularly in marine systems, and provide greater financial and management support to those that already exist
Use all relevant forms of knowledge and information about ecosystems in decision-making, including the knowledge of local and indigenous groups

15. What can we do about it? Influence individual behavior
Provide public education on why and how to reduce consumption of threatened ecosystem services
Establish reliable certification systems to give people the choice to buy sustainably harvested products
Give people access to information about ecosystems and decisions affecting their services
Develop and use environment-friendly technology
Invest in agricultural science and technology aimed at increasing food production with minimal harmful trade-offs
Restore degraded ecosystems
Promote technologies to increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions

16. Strengths and Weaknesses of the MA
Useful conceptual framework - but limited data and information to quantitatively assess the inter-linkages
Limited economic analysis
Sub-global assessments did not follow the suggested methodologies – inadequate buy-in of local decision-makers

17. UK Sustainable Development Strategy
Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement a shared UK priority
Commitment to develop clear vision and coherent approach
More integrated policy framework focused on whole ecosystems
Better understanding of environmental limits

18. Where we are now Natural environment PSA
Secure a healthy natural environment for everyone’s health, well-being and prosperity, now and in the future; and reflect in decision-making the value of the services that it provides.
Ecosystems Approach project
Deliver an action plan for embedding an ecosystems approach to policy-making and delivery by the end of 2007.

19. Natural Environment PSA
Secure a healthy natural environment for everyone’s well-being, health and prosperity, now and in the future
Indicators and targets
Air
Water
Land & Soil
Biodiversity
Marine
Ecosystems Approach

20. Ecosystems Approach Project - Aim
“To embed an ecosystems approach to conserving, managing and enhancing the natural environment across policy-making and delivery”
Policies designed to deliver healthy, functioning ecosystems
Reflect the true value of ecosystem services in decision-making

21. Ecosystems Approach Action Plan
Defra aiming to publish action plan by end 2007
Key themes:
Mainstreaming an ecosystems approach
Valuing ecosystem services in decision-making
Environmental limits, targets and indicators
Ecosystems and climate change
Developing the evidence base

22. An ecosystems approach – key principles
Manage on a whole ecosystems basis to maintain ecosystem services
True value of ecosystem services reflected in decision making – including long-term costs & benefits
Respect environmental limits taking into account ecosystem functioning
Manage at an appropriate spatial scale
Adaptive management

23. Benefits
Better informed decisions in context of sustainable development
More effective prioritisation and allocation of resources
Greater awareness and recognition of value of natural environment
Improved environmental outcomes – living within environmental limits

24. Valuing ecosystem services
Defra developing an introductory guide for policy-makers and economists – for CSR07?
Planning to road-test within Defra and Defra network
Keen to work with OGDs on case studies or pilots
Longer term aim to integrate into policy appraisal/impact assessments

25. Degradation of ecosystem services often causes significant harm to human well-being
Degradation tends to lead to the loss of non-marketed benefits from ecosystems
The economic value of these benefits is often high and sometimes higher than the marketed benefits
Timber and fuelwood generally accounted for less than a third of total economic value of forests in eight Mediterranean countries.

26. Degradation of ecosystem services often causes significant harm to human well-being
The total economic value associated with managing ecosystems more sustainably is often higher than the value associated with conversion
Conversion may still occur because private economic benefits are often greater for the converted system

27. Living With Environmental Change

28. ISSUE: We live in the midst of human-induced climate and environmental changes that increasingly pressurise our natural resources and ecosystem services, and so challenge our social and economic well-being (emphasised by Stern Review, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, HMT Challenge 5, IPCC 4th Assessment)
Living With Environmental Change will meet this challenge by providing the required predictive science, solutions and business opportunities to increase resilience to, and reduce the economic costs of, environmental changes.
Through an unprecedented partnership connecting natural, engineering, economic, social, medical, cultural, arts & humanities researchers with policy makers, business, the public, and other key stakeholders.

29. Living With Environmental Change
10-year interdisciplinary research & policy partnership programme to increase resilience to — and reduce costs of — environmental change:
considering natural resources, ecosystem services, economic growth & social progress;
on the time & space scales on which the economy is managed;
learning how, when & where to take action (smart intervention);
£1Bn effort
NERC, ESRC, EPSRC, BBSRC, MRC, AHRC, Defra, DFID, SE, DfT, EA, DCLG, NE, WAG, SEPA.
First meeting of LWEC Partners’ Board
(July 2007)
Formally agreed partnership, including:
governance & management
recruitment of Director & Chair
how to identify strategic objectives
communications strategy
Cited in Secretary of State’s press release on science budget allocation – 10 Oct 2007
Set to agree strategic objectives Nov/Dec 2007
Possible points to make:
Drivers for LWEC: HMT5, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Stern, IPCC 4
Strapline: See green box for current partnership; in addition will have other key stakeholders closely involved e.g. MetO, industry (e.g. Microsoft, Willis insurance, courting many others such as Bayer, BMW, BP, Shell...)
Key characteristics of LWEC (top 4 bullets):
Whole-system approach spanning full range of sciences linking environment to human behaviour, with approaches co-designed across the partnership (i.e. optimising KE in programme design to ensure maximum economic impact). Predictive element is critical, and central to NERC contribution. Might want to give 1 or 2 examples of what ecosystem services are, e.g. clean water, flood & disease protection, food.
Scales: local-regional and seasonal-decadal; scientifically challenging, but economically required.
Design of tools for smart intervention – otherwise we just don’t know where to start
Introduce concept of foundation and new, and the commitment of partners to re-orient the foundations (cite December 2006 letter to Treasury: ERFF members will work together to implement LWEC, diverting existing resources to address this priority over the short timescale required to start to address this issue, but there is a need for additional resource from Government.” )
How will this be done? The LWEC partnership will design a set of common strategic objectives and build and implement a research strategy based on the policy needs of each of the countries of the UK and their world-leading strengths in both research and policy development.
Example outcomes: (as per Del Plan) – you might want to mention 2 or 3?
A successful LWEC will provide, over the next decade, the research needed to deliver outcomes such as:
Sustainable supply of clean water to SE England;
New crops in SW England
Reduced risk of flood damage from severe weather and sea-level rise
Keener insurance market
More resilient buildings
New practices in sustainable management of ecosystem services in developing countries that alleviate poverty and improve human well-being
More successful policy implementation due to appropriate integration of human behaviour in analyses
Mental health benefits from green space in cities and access to countryside
Better advice to our forces overseas in theatre operations
Improved response strategies to, and mitigation of, vector-borne diseases;
Fewer premature human deaths
Recent progress:
First meeting of Partners’ Board. Emphasise that this is highest-level Board of LWEC, peopled by those with significant financial and strategic executive authority; CE and Director Science level for key partners. This meeting made LWEC real, in terms of partner commitment, with the basic tenets of LWEC agreed, and initial resources allocated by all to set up and recruit. Critical next step is to agree the specific common strategic objectives that the partnership will address, for which a process was broadly agreed; to be identified by Autumn.
Real example of need:
Gordon Brown quote. We need LWEC so that in the years to come, we can cope much better with events such as the current flooding.
[To follow: examples of the sort of research that LWEC could do that would increase resilience to, and reduce costs of, such flooding events in a few years time]
Generic aims of LWEC, research areas covered and key NERC contributions are in Del Plan.
Latter are reproduced below, for easy reference if you need them:
The design of tools to decide how, when & where to take action to remain within sustainable limits, through linkage of natural resources, ecosystems, human behaviour & well-being
The ecosystems research required to improve sustainable management of ecosystem services, and thus alleviate poverty, in the developing world (Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) programme, in partnership with DFID and ESRC).
Climate and environmental change prediction on local-regional and seasonal-decadal scales, through creating the next generation of high-resolution climate models supported by more strategic observing systems and identification of key feedback processes.
Optimised biodiversity conservation strategies, through developing and applying new techniques to whole-ecosystem biodiversity quantification, its role in ecosystem functioning, and its resilience to environmental change
A national strategic decision-making framework for observation of environmental change (key partners: ERFF, Met Office, Defra).

30. Living With Environmental Change
Aims to deliver (1):
Whole-system assessments and risk-based predictions of environmental change and the effects on ecosystem services, economies and communities on local-regional and seasonal-decadal scales
Integrated analyses of the potential economic, social & environmental costs, benefits and impacts of different mitigation and adaptation responses
(cont)
Possible points to make:
Drivers for LWEC: HMT5, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Stern, IPCC 4
Strapline: See green box for current partnership; in addition will have other key stakeholders closely involved e.g. MetO, industry (e.g. Microsoft, Willis insurance, courting many others such as Bayer, BMW, BP, Shell...)
Key characteristics of LWEC (top 4 bullets):
Whole-system approach spanning full range of sciences linking environment to human behaviour, with approaches co-designed across the partnership (i.e. optimising KE in programme design to ensure maximum economic impact). Predictive element is critical, and central to NERC contribution. Might want to give 1 or 2 examples of what ecosystem services are, e.g. clean water, flood & disease protection, food.
Scales: local-regional and seasonal-decadal; scientifically challenging, but economically required.
Design of tools for smart intervention – otherwise we just don’t know where to start
Introduce concept of foundation and new, and the commitment of partners to re-orient the foundations (cite December 2006 letter to Treasury: ERFF members will work together to implement LWEC, diverting existing resources to address this priority over the short timescale required to start to address this issue, but there is a need for additional resource from Government.” )
How will this be done? The LWEC partnership will design a set of common strategic objectives and build and implement a research strategy based on the policy needs of each of the countries of the UK and their world-leading strengths in both research and policy development.
Example outcomes: (as per Del Plan) – you might want to mention 2 or 3?
A successful LWEC will provide, over the next decade, the research needed to deliver outcomes such as:
Sustainable supply of clean water to SE England;
New crops in SW England
Reduced risk of flood damage from severe weather and sea-level rise
Keener insurance market
More resilient buildings
New practices in sustainable management of ecosystem services in developing countries that alleviate poverty and improve human well-being
More successful policy implementation due to appropriate integration of human behaviour in analyses
Mental health benefits from green space in cities and access to countryside
Better advice to our forces overseas in theatre operations
Improved response strategies to, and mitigation of, vector-borne diseases;
Fewer premature human deaths
Recent progress:
First meeting of Partners’ Board. Emphasise that this is highest-level Board of LWEC, peopled by those with significant financial and strategic executive authority; CE and Director Science level for key partners. This meeting made LWEC real, in terms of partner commitment, with the basic tenets of LWEC agreed, and initial resources allocated by all to set up and recruit. Critical next step is to agree the specific common strategic objectives that the partnership will address, for which a process was broadly agreed; to be identified by Autumn.
Real example of need:
Gordon Brown quote. We need LWEC so that in the years to come, we can cope much better with events such as the current flooding.
[To follow: examples of the sort of research that LWEC could do that would increase resilience to, and reduce costs of, such flooding events in a few years time]
Generic aims of LWEC, research areas covered and key NERC contributions are in Del Plan.
Latter are reproduced below, for easy reference if you need them:
The design of tools to decide how, when & where to take action to remain within sustainable limits, through linkage of natural resources, ecosystems, human behaviour & well-being
The ecosystems research required to improve sustainable management of ecosystem services, and thus alleviate poverty, in the developing world (Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) programme, in partnership with DFID and ESRC).
Climate and environmental change prediction on local-regional and seasonal-decadal scales, through creating the next generation of high-resolution climate models supported by more strategic observing systems and identification of key feedback processes.
Optimised biodiversity conservation strategies, through developing and applying new techniques to whole-ecosystem biodiversity quantification, its role in ecosystem functioning, and its resilience to environmental change
A national strategic decision-making framework for observation of environmental change (key partners: ERFF, Met Office, Defra).

31. Living With Environmental Change
Aims to deliver (2):
Guidance for more effective sustainable management of ecosystem services, as a foundation for resilient economic development and social progress,
New technology and infrastructure solutions in the management of environmental change
A more research-informed dialogue and debate about the environmental challenges and choices that we face and their economic and social consequences
Possible points to make:
Drivers for LWEC: HMT5, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Stern, IPCC 4
Strapline: See green box for current partnership; in addition will have other key stakeholders closely involved e.g. MetO, industry (e.g. Microsoft, Willis insurance, courting many others such as Bayer, BMW, BP, Shell...)
Key characteristics of LWEC (top 4 bullets):
Whole-system approach spanning full range of sciences linking environment to human behaviour, with approaches co-designed across the partnership (i.e. optimising KE in programme design to ensure maximum economic impact). Predictive element is critical, and central to NERC contribution. Might want to give 1 or 2 examples of what ecosystem services are, e.g. clean water, flood & disease protection, food.
Scales: local-regional and seasonal-decadal; scientifically challenging, but economically required.
Design of tools for smart intervention – otherwise we just don’t know where to start
Introduce concept of foundation and new, and the commitment of partners to re-orient the foundations (cite December 2006 letter to Treasury: ERFF members will work together to implement LWEC, diverting existing resources to address this priority over the short timescale required to start to address this issue, but there is a need for additional resource from Government.” )
How will this be done? The LWEC partnership will design a set of common strategic objectives and build and implement a research strategy based on the policy needs of each of the countries of the UK and their world-leading strengths in both research and policy development.
Example outcomes: (as per Del Plan) – you might want to mention 2 or 3?
A successful LWEC will provide, over the next decade, the research needed to deliver outcomes such as:
Sustainable supply of clean water to SE England;
New crops in SW England
Reduced risk of flood damage from severe weather and sea-level rise
Keener insurance market
More resilient buildings
New practices in sustainable management of ecosystem services in developing countries that alleviate poverty and improve human well-being
More successful policy implementation due to appropriate integration of human behaviour in analyses
Mental health benefits from green space in cities and access to countryside
Better advice to our forces overseas in theatre operations
Improved response strategies to, and mitigation of, vector-borne diseases;
Fewer premature human deaths
Recent progress:
First meeting of Partners’ Board. Emphasise that this is highest-level Board of LWEC, peopled by those with significant financial and strategic executive authority; CE and Director Science level for key partners. This meeting made LWEC real, in terms of partner commitment, with the basic tenets of LWEC agreed, and initial resources allocated by all to set up and recruit. Critical next step is to agree the specific common strategic objectives that the partnership will address, for which a process was broadly agreed; to be identified by Autumn.
Real example of need:
Gordon Brown quote. We need LWEC so that in the years to come, we can cope much better with events such as the current flooding.
[To follow: examples of the sort of research that LWEC could do that would increase resilience to, and reduce costs of, such flooding events in a few years time]
Generic aims of LWEC, research areas covered and key NERC contributions are in Del Plan.
Latter are reproduced below, for easy reference if you need them:
The design of tools to decide how, when & where to take action to remain within sustainable limits, through linkage of natural resources, ecosystems, human behaviour & well-being
The ecosystems research required to improve sustainable management of ecosystem services, and thus alleviate poverty, in the developing world (Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) programme, in partnership with DFID and ESRC).
Climate and environmental change prediction on local-regional and seasonal-decadal scales, through creating the next generation of high-resolution climate models supported by more strategic observing systems and identification of key feedback processes.
Optimised biodiversity conservation strategies, through developing and applying new techniques to whole-ecosystem biodiversity quantification, its role in ecosystem functioning, and its resilience to environmental change
A national strategic decision-making framework for observation of environmental change (key partners: ERFF, Met Office, Defra).

32. Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA)
A joint initiative from the
Department for International Development
Natural Environment Research Council
Economic and Social Research Council

33. UK context
DFID Science Strategy – “Managing global challenges will require investment in science, technological advances and innovation. Developing country governments need access to the best international expertise. With the right networks, scientists in developing countries can encourage governments to use their skills to help the poor.”
“People in the poorest countries are most reliant on environmental resources for their livelihoods. These resources are already under pressure and likely to be degraded further by climate change.”

34. Meeting the Challenge
Environmental science to understand why ecosystems are becoming degraded and how to stabilise and reverse this trend
Ecological economics to place a better value on ecosystem services;
Political economics to identify what institutional changes are needed so that that the costs and benefits of improved ecosystem management is fairly distributed to the poor

35. Scientific Challenges
Improved information/understanding/methodologies:
ecosystem functioning and its relationship with the supply of ecosystem services
state of and trends in ecosystems and their services
the impacts of ecosystem change on human well-being
environmental limits and how to define them
valuing ecosystem services for decision-making
forecasting of changes in ecosystems and their services, including trends and scenarios
policy options for responding to future change

36. Ecosystems evidence needs
How are ecosystem services provided?
Improved information on ecosystem functioning and delivery of ecosystem goods and services
What is the state of service provision?
Information on state and trends in ecosystems and ecosystem services; and ways to monitor this over time
Does this matter?
Information on impacts of ecosystem change on human wellbeing and ways to establish public preferences and values
Building the evidence base on environmental limits and how to define them
There are a broad range of evidence needs associated with action to address ecosystem decline and ensure a sustainable supply of ecosystem goods and services…..these have been explored through a range of initiatives (e.g. work of the UK Biodiversituy Research Advisory Group; work by the European Platform of Biodiversity Research and Defra’s ecosystem approach project). Policy makers and the research community now need to work together to better articulate these needs; to prioritise them against the main policy challenges facing us into the future and to work collaboratively and across disciplines to meet these needs

37. Ecosystems evidence needs - cont
What will happen in the future?
Improved forecasting of changes in ecosystems and ecosystem services, including trends and scenarios
What can we do about it?
Improved methodologies for valuing ecosystem services in decision making
Improved understanding of policy options for responding to future change

38. Further information available at