Post on 27-Mar-2015
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
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)
• 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
• 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
Source: Bishop, J. and Garzon, P-A. (2002).The Economic Value of Wild Resources in Senegal. IUCN and IIED.
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
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
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.
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
The costs of environmental damage
Waza LogoneIrrigation scheme curtails flooding, floodplain out-migration and poverty
$2.4 million a year$2.4 million a year
Barotse FloodplainLarge-scale rice scheme interferes with hydrology and wetland resources
$7 million NPV$7 million NPV
Nakivubo SwampLand reclamation reduces swamp wastewater treatment functions
$2 million a year$2 million a year
Indus DeltaLow flows cause saltwater intrusion, mangrove die-off
and reduced livelihoods Up to $95 million a yearUp to $95 million a year
Muthurajawela MarshIndustrial expansion
impacts wetland services and lagoon fisheries
$8 million a year$8 million a year
Tana RiverDams alter hydrology,
impacts downstream ecosystems and economies $27 million NPV$27 million NPV
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
Opportunity costs of conservation
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
US$
/yea
r
Costs Benefits
Local costs and benefits of Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda
Revenue sharing
Local financing gap
Use of PA resources
Loss of pasture
Wildlife damage to farms
Restrictions on resource use
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 BULLETNeed to…
–create economic opportunity–reduce vulnerability and insecurity–support participation in decision-
making–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
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Well-off Middle Poor
Wealth rank
Per
cen
tag
e o
f h
ou
seh
old
s
1996
2002
Emerton, L. (2003) NTFPs and poverty reduction in Nam Pheng, Lao PDR. IUCN.
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
Carbon: a new market opportunity for the poor in developing countries?
ANNUAL VOLUMES (million tCO2e) OF PROJECT-BASED EMISSION REDUCTIONS TRADED (up to 2012 vintages)
Source: World Bank, State and Trends of Carbon Market, 2004
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004(Jan-May)
Not Kyoto Pre-Compliance Kyoto Pre-Compliance
• FOR PRO-POOR CARBON MARKETS, NEED TO FOCUS ON:– 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)
[ 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 poverty-
environment 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
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
September 8 – 17, 2003
[ http://www.iucn.org ]
Pro-PoorConservation
New Partnerships
MainstreamingIn program
Capacity Building
Knowledge management
and Communications
Analyze and Document IUCN
Experience
ConceptualFramework
Institutional Change
Change Management Process Within IUCN