Are you an environmental skeptic?

F8L · Sep 30, 2007

This is the main page for downloading or viewing synthesis reports"

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment synthesis reports

For those who don't spend time reading much, this is a 2-page summary of the Health Synthesis report. Ecosystems and their effect on Health.

This page is a main overview of the MA: What is is, what it found, etc.

Sample:

What is the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)?
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) was called for by the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2000. Initiated in 2001, the objective of the MA was to assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being and the scientific basis for action needed to enhance the conservation and sustainable use of those systems and their contribution to human well-being. The MA has involved the work of more than 1,360 experts worldwide. Their findings, contained in five technical volumes and six synthesis reports, provide a state-of-the-art scientific appraisal of the condition and trends in the worldâ€™s ecosystems and the services they provide (such as clean water, food, forest products, flood control, and natural resources) and the options to restore, conserve or enhance the sustainable use of ecosystems.

What are the main findings of the MA?
Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable period of time in human history, largely to meet rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fiber and fuel. This has resulted in a substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on Earth.
The changes that have been made to ecosystems have contributed to substantial net gains in human well-being and economic development, but these gains have been achieved at growing costs in the form of the degradation of many ecosystem services, increased risks of nonlinear changes, and the exacerbation of poverty for some groups of people. These problems, unless addressed, will substantially diminish the benefits that future generations obtain from ecosystems.
The degradation of ecosystem services could grow significantly worse during the first half of this century and is a barrier to achieving the Millennium Development Goals.
The challenge of reversing the degradation of ecosystem while meeting increasing demands for services can be partially met under some scenarios considered by the MA, but will involve significant changes in policies, institutions and practices that are not currently under way. Many options exist to conserve or enhance specific ecosystem services in ways that reduce negative trade-offs or that provide positive synergies with other ecosystem services.
The bottom line of the MA findings is that human actions are depleting Earthâ€™s natural capital, putting such strain on the environment that the ability of the planetâ€™s ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted. At the same time, the assessment shows that with appropriate actions it is possible to reverse the degradation of many ecosystem services over the next 50 years, but the changes in policy and practice required are substantial and not currently underway.

What is new about the MA findings?
The MA, like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), assessed current knowledge, scientific literature, and data. Thus, at the most basic level, assessments of this nature synthesize information that has previously been available, and do not present new research findings. Nevertheless, three aspects of the MA do represent important new contributions.

First, the findings of this assessment are the consensus view of the largest body of social and natural scientists ever assembled to assess knowledge in this area. The availability of this broad consensus view of scientists is an important contribution to decision-making. The assessment identifies where broad consensus exists on findings but also where the information is insufficient to reach firm conclusions.

Second, the focus of this assessment on ecosystem services and their link to human well-being and development needs is unique. By examining the environment through the framework of ecosystem services, it becomes much easier to identify how changes in ecosystems influence human well-being and to provide information in a form that decision-makers can weigh alongside other social and economic information.

Third, the assessment identified a number of â€˜emergentâ€™ findings, conclusions that can only be reached when a large body of existing information is examined together. Four of these stand out:

[
The balance sheet. Although individual ecosystem services have been assessed previously, the finding that 60% of a group of 24 ecosystem services examined by the MA are being degraded is the first comprehensive audit of the status of Earthâ€™s natural capital.

Nonlinear changes. Nonlinear (accelerating or abrupt) changes have been previously identified by a number of individual studies of ecosystems. The MA is the first assessment to conclude that ecosystem changes are increasing the likelihood of nonlinear changes in ecosystems and the first to note the important consequences of this finding for human well-being. Examples of such changes include disease emergence, abrupt alterations in water quality, the creation of â€œdead zonesâ€ in coastal waters, the collapse of fisheries, and shifts in regional climate.

Drylands. Because the assessment focuses on the linkages between ecosystems and human well-being, a somewhat different set of priorities emerge from it. While the MA does confirm that major problems exist with tropical forests and coral reefs, from the standpoint of linkages between ecosystems and people, the most significant challenges involve dryland ecosystems. These ecosystems are particularly fragile, but they are also the places where human population is growing most rapidly, biological productivity is least, and poverty is highest.

Nutrient loading. The MA confirms the emphasis that decision-makers are already giving to addressing important drivers of ecosystem change such as climate change and habitat loss. But the MA finds that excessive nutrient loading of ecosystems is one of the major drivers today and will grow significantly worse in the coming decades unless action is taken. The issue of excessive nutrient loading, although well studied, is not yet receiving significant policy attention in many countries or internationally.

[/b]
Click to expand...

Godiva · Sep 30, 2007

What is nutrient loading?

F8L · Sep 30, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Sep 30 2007, 12:40 PM) [snapback]519522[/snapback]</div>

What is nutrient loading?
[/b]
Click to expand...

An excess of nutrients entering systems (Rivers, Lakes, Streams, Bays, Oceans, Soils etc.). Examples include but are not limited to, nitrogen, phosphorus, CO2, and other organic materials, This often leads to an excess of algae growth and then decay. Bacteria can then deplete disolved oxygen and thus lead to reduced productivity or even dead zones like the famous Gulf of Mexico dead-zone at the mouth of the Mississippi. This reduction in oxygen is refered to as "hypoxia".

More info on drivers and nutrient loading:

GreenFacts.org

chogan · Oct 1, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Sep 30 2007, 03:40 PM) [snapback]519522[/snapback]</div>

What is nutrient loading?
[/b]
Click to expand...

Nutrient loading and increased sediment are the main factors leading to degradation of the Chesapeake Bay here. The main sources here are fertilizer runoff from farm fields, and effluent from chicken farms.

A good historical note: The main nutrients of in question are nitrogen and phosphorus. Much of the phosphorus in the Chesapeake used to come from laundry detergent. The story of the conflict over limiting phosphorus is kind of interesting, because it stopped with individual state bans, but no Federal action. At least I don't think there was ever Federal action.

http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/full_text...CDocs/94-54.htm

Even though the scientific evidence on detergent phosphates was in the public domain in the mid-1960s, the phosphate ban didn't go into effect around here until the mid-1980s. So when you wonder whether people really will degrade the environment just for the pleasure of driving a big SUV, recall that they cheerfully did just for the pleasure of whiter, brighter clothes. And yes, it took a law to stop it. And it largely worked -- phosphate going into the bay is down about 75% from pre-ban levels.

And it's still going on. The same process is now being played out over phosphate in dishwasher detergent.

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2007/06/07/...608ebeling.html

SSimon · Oct 1, 2007

I'm making my way through this. My comments so far are that the report does a great job of quantifying trends and corresponding healthy ecosystems with providing our required resources and that of a better qualify of life. I'm aware of the necessity of ecosystems for our life support, but never really thought of them in terms of allowing us "Freedom of Choice". I think that that's because I must also take these systems for granted at some level. That why I fear that those that have no knowledge of the necessity, function and dynamic of these systems will surely believe that we can thrive and adapt to any changes we impose on these systems. How many times have you heard this position as a reply to climate change? They can turn on their a/c unit and be just fine.

I think that in order to have the biggest impact on societal changes/perception of our ecosystems, they need to tie these trends and data in with the economic impacts caused by our degrading actions. Then they can also quantify the economic incentives for implementing more environmentally sound actions when initiating human development (especially of agricultural areas). For instance, the monetary costs resulting from the destruction of mangroves has to be easily quantified in terms of flooding, coastal erosion, loss of protein food sources, clean water etc. (*Edit - I see they've done this a degree.)

I'm happy to know of this report and that we now have some sort of a baseline to which we'll be able to compare future trends. Hopefully the future trends are not as bleak.

F8L · May 26, 2008

I was looking to TTT this thread and I didn't see your original reply SSimon, sorry about that.

I agree with you, but then you already knew that.

Are you an environmental skeptic?

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

chogan New Member

SSimon Active Member

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

Are you an environmental skeptic?

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands

chogan New Member

SSimon Active Member

F8L Protecting Habitat & AG Lands