Environmental policy in the era of the MDGs

Environmental policy in the era of the MDGs Overview: 1. What do we know about poverty – environment linkages? 2. What have we learned about poverty reduction through environmental management? 3. What challenges lie ahead? [ http://www.iucn.org ] Poverty-environment: what we know (1) • COINCIDENCE – More than 1 billion of the world‟s poorest people live within 25 biodiversity “hotspots” – 25% of forests in developing countries are owned or managed by local communities • DEPENDENCY – 90% of rural households in developing countries rely on biomass for cooking and heating – Forests contribute on average 22% of income of rural households; poorest are the most dependent [ http://www.iucn.org ] Source: Bishop, J. and Garzon, P-A. (2002).The Economic Value of Wild Resources in Senegal. IUCN and IIED. Poverty-environment: what we know (2) • VULNERABILITY – > 90% of world‟s major natural disasters took place in developing countries between 1990-98 – Environmental factors are the direct cause of 25% of all preventable illnesses • COMPLEXITY – Poverty more than material deprivation; environmental quality part of human well-being – The poor have strong incentives to conserve natural resources on which they depend – But the poor also often deplete resources to low levels, because they lack better options [ http://www.iucn.org ] The value of ecosystem services ONE EXAMPLE • Wild forest-based pollinators increased coffee yields by 20% on farms located within 1 km of forest in Costa Rica • Improved quality by reducing “peaberries” (misshapen seeds) by 27% • In 2002-03, pollination services from two forest fragments (46 and 111 ha) translated into about US$60,000 per year for one study farm [ http://www.iucn.org ] Source: Ricketts, T.H., Daily, G.C., Ehrlich, P.R. and Michener, C.D. 2004. „Economic value of tropical forest to coffee production,‟ Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/ pnas. 0405147101. The costs of environmental damage Waza Logone Irrigation scheme curtails flooding, floodplain outmigration and poverty $2.4 million a year Indus Delta Low flows cause saltwater intrusion, mangrove die-off and reduced livelihoods Up to $95 million a year Barotse Floodplain Large-scale rice scheme interferes with hydrology and wetland resources $7 million NPV Muthurajawela Marsh Industrial expansion impacts wetland services and lagoon fisheries $8 million a year Nakivubo Swamp Land reclamation reduces swamp wastewater treatment functions $2 million a year [ http://www.iucn.org ] Tana River Dams alter hydrology, impacts downstream ecosystems and economies $27 million NPV Opportunity costs of conservation Local costs and benefits of Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda 800,000 700,000 600,000 US$/year Loss of pasture 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Restrictions on resource use Wildlife damage to farms Local financing gap Use of PA resources Revenue sharing Costs Benefits Source: Emerton, L. 1998. Balancing the Opportunity Costs of Wildlife Conservation for the Communities Around Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda. Evaluating Eden Discussion Paper EE DP 05, International Institute for Environment and Development: London. [ http://www.iucn.org ] Poverty reduction via environmental management: lessons learned (1) • NO SILVER BULLET Need to… – create economic opportunity – reduce vulnerability and insecurity – support participation in decisionmaking – strengthen capacity to seize opportunities … environmental management can contribute across all dimensions [ http://www.iucn.org ] Poverty reduction via environmental management: lessons learned (2) • PROVEN STRATEGIES: – – – – – – improve access to information and public services reduce constraints on sustainable resource use (e.g. licensing, credit, tenure) improve governance and the rule of law, including decentralized NR management promote participation of women and other marginalized groups in decision-making address local priorities, e.g. water pollution, restoration of critical natural resources promote sustainable use rather than preservation (e.g. essential oils, eco-tourism) Changes in village wealth ranking 1996-2002 Percentage of households 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Well-off Middle Wealth rank Poor 1996 2002 [ http://www.iucn.org ] Emerton, L. (2003) NTFPs and poverty reduction in Nam Pheng, Lao PDR. IUCN. Carbon: a new market opportunity for the poor in developing countries? • FOR PRO-POOR CARBON MARKETS, NEED TO FOCUS ON: ANNUAL VOLUM ES (million tCO2e) OF PROJECT-BASED EM ISSION REDUCTIONS TRADED (up to 2012 vintages) Source: World Bank, State and Trends of Carbon Market, 2004 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 (JanMay) – Areas where the poor live (rural settings) – Sectors the poor work in (agriculture, forestry) – Factors of production the poor own (land, labour) – Outputs the poor can produce (biomass) – Markets the poor can access (food, fiber) – Costs the poor can manage (certification) Not Kyoto Pre-Compliance Kyoto Pre-Compliance [ http://www.iucn.org ] Integrating poverty and environment: what challenges lie ahead? (1) • REAL INTEGRATION – More attention to natural resource management in poverty reduction – Better indicators of povertyenvironment linkages • MORE COOPERATION – reduce and remove perverse subsidies (agric., fish, water) – find better ways to pay for global public goods that deliver benefits to the poor – enlist the private sector in poverty reduction and conservation [ http://www.iucn.org ] Integrating poverty and environment: what challenges lie ahead? (2) • PRO-POOR CONSERVATION – “do no harm” to the poor and contribute to poverty reduction wherever possible – social impact assessment of conservation policies and projects – full and fair compensation for loss of access to natural resources – more attention to reducing risk and enhancing incomes from sustainable use – ensure market-based conservation measures are accessible to the poor [ http://www.iucn.org ] Poverty and Conservation at the World Parks Congress, Durban, South Africa September 8 – 17, 2003 Final Recommendation on Poverty and Protected Areas • Protected areas should contribute to poverty reduction and at the very minimum must not contribute to or exacerbate poverty • Communities should be fairly and fully compensated for any negative social, cultural and economic impacts [ http://www.iucn.org ] Change Management Process Within IUCN Capacity Building Conceptual Framework New Partnerships Institutional Change Pro-Poor Conservation Mainstreaming In program Knowledge management and Communications Analyze and Document IUCN Experience [ http://www.iucn.org ]