00 Change Challenge final - · PDF filein collaboration with the Division of GEF Coordination...

Published by United Nations Environment Programme

Copyright © 2002, United Nations Environment Programme

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profitpurposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source ismade. UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source.

No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever withoutprior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme.

DISCLAIMERThe contents of this volume do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP or contributory

organizations. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinionwhatsoever on the part of UNEP or contributory organizations concerning the legal status of any country,

territory, city or area or its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Produced by the UNEP GEO teamDivision of Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA)

in collaboration with the Division of GEF Coordination (DGEF)

Contacts:Marion E. Cheatle

Head, Global Environment Outlook SectionTel: (254-2) 623520; Fax: (254-2) 623944; E-mail: [email protected]

Ahmed DjoghlafDirector, Division of GEF Coordination (DGEF)

Tel: (254-2) 624165; Fax: (254-2) 520825; E-mail: [email protected]

Contributing editor: Robert LambCover photos: Munyaradzi Chenje

Design and production: bounford.comThis publication is printed on recycled paper.

Original references, sources and acknowledgements can be found in GEO-3.

UNEP

The UNEP Global Environment Outlook(GEO) project addresses one of theimportant objectives of Agenda 21: the roleof information in sustainable development.GEO is designed to provide policy-makerswith the information they need to make wisedecisions about the future of theenvironment - one of the pillars tosustainable development. It is intended topromote consensus on identifying theglobal and regional issues that theinternational community needs to address,and on prioritizing environmental problemsand action.

The third GEO report was published just afew months before the World Summit onSustainable Development (WSSD) to providea foundation for the WSSD review of policiesfor sustainable development.

The study takes a unique look at the policyand environmental impacts of the past 30years. It also outlines four policy approachesfor the next three decades and compares thelikely impacts on people and their naturalenvironments.

GEO-3, which was prepared by morethan 1 000 individuals and 40 institutionsfrom around the world, concludes that agreat deal of environmental change hasalready taken place since the establishmentin 1972 of the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme.

Convening just one month after WSSD, theSecond GEF Assembly provides anopportunity for member countries to lookback over the achievements of the Facilityduring its first decade – the decade sinceRio – and to set the directions of the GEF inlight of global environmental trends, recentmultilateral agreements, and the outcomesof WSSD.

To this end, UNEP has prepared this briefingbased on GEO reports, especially tailored tothe GEF needs and requirements.

I am confident that this state of theenvironment overview for the GEF, thatlooks back over the past 30 years and to theoutlook for the next 30 years, will assistthat process.

Klaus TöpferExecutive DirectorUnited Nations Environment Programme

FOREWORD

CHANGE and

CHALLENGEA state of the environment briefing for the Global Environment Facility

The GEO project and process

A Governing Council decision of May 1995called on UNEP to produce a comprehensive andregular report on the state of the globalenvironment. Two major strands of activity arosefrom this decision: a cooperative, integratedenvironmental assessment process and a reportseries. The initial task was to agree, throughdialogue and consensus, on the priority issuesand assessment agendas. These consultationsembraced inclusive and multidisciplinary ideals,with an eye to the added value of buildingenvironmental assessment capacity in everyregion to reliable and compatible levels, throughtraining and ‘learning by doing’ initiatives.

Tracking environmental changeAt the core of the present-day assessmentprocess that arose from these beginnings is acoordinated global network of collaboratingcentres (CCs). Their agenda includes integratedassessments along lines agreed betweenscientific and policy professionals in a regularround of regional scientific and policyconsultations. But they also fulfil a watchdogrole, retrieving and channelling environmental

reports and alerts from the grassroots up.

Almost all regional inputs to the GEOassessments now originate from the CCs. Anarray of specialized research institutions suppliesexpertise on issues and themes that transcendregional concerns or link several lines of enquirytogether. In addition, GEO can call on thesupport of working groups for assessmentmethodology, process planning and similarstructural essentials.

Through the system-wide Earthwatch network,other UN agencies supply a wealth ofsubstantive data and knowledge from their ownprojects and points of view, on sharedenvironmental care and sustainable developmentconcerns and goals. These peer institutions alsoassist in the review process, helping to ensurethat the performance of GEO matchesexpectations.

Informing and responding GEO reporting and fact-finding activities hingeon the critical role of information - and universalaccess to it - in sustainable development. This

need was underlined at the 1992 UNCEDsummit and in Agenda 21, a decisive factor inthe launch of GEO. It was further endorsed bythe Ministerial Declaration adopted at the FirstGlobal Ministerial Environment Forum in Malmö,Sweden, in May 2000.

UNEP’s response to the information mandate isits flagship output, the GEO report series, issuedat regular intervals in print and electronicformats. Separate national and regional or sub-regional assessments are also published, as aretechnical and other background reports.

Most of the data that underpin GEO are alsoavailable on the Internet through the GEO DataPortal. Some 300 dynamic data sets can beaccessed and downloaded. Easy to operate toolsenable users to explore and picture statisticaland geographical assessment data in chart,table or map form and on scales that range fromnational to global. Other activities include GEOfor Youth, an outreach project involving youngpeople.

This booklet draws upon the UNEP GlobalEnvironment Outlook (GEO) reports tohighlight recent developments in the focalareas of the GEF. It combines a globaloverview of each focal area with a round up ofkey trends in the GEF priority regions – Africa,Asia and the Pacific, Eastern Europe, LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, and West Asia.

The booklet was prepared by the UnitedNations Environment Programme Division ofGEF Coordination (DGEF) and the Division ofEarly Warning and Assessment (DEWA). It isbased on findings published in GEO-2000(1999) and GEO-3 (2002), the latest inUNEP’s flagship state-of-the-environmentreport series.

The summarized extracts that followhighlight developments in the GEF’sestablished focal areas of biological diversty,climate change, ozone layer depletion andinternational waters. They also touch oncurrent concerns in land degradation,primarily desertification and deforestation,and persistent organic pollutants (POPs),two topics to be proposed for adoption asadditional focal areas at the second GEFAssembly, this document’s principalintended readership.

The GEF was established in 1991 as apartnership of UNEP, the United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) and theWorld Bank. It is a mechanism that providesnew, and additional, grant and concessionalfunding to help tackle concerns in the areasnoted above.

As well as acting as the financial mechanismto the Convention on Biological Diversity(CBD) and UN Framework Convention onClimate Change (UNFCCC), the GEF is thefinancial mechanism to the CartagenaProtocol on Biosafety and the interimfinancial mechanism to the StockholmConvention on POPs. Policy responsemeasures under the GEF are part of theintegrated environmental assessment onwhich this booklet is based. In highlightingenvironmental change and challenges facingthe international community, each of thefocal area sections in the booklet presentsglobal and regional summaries of the recentconditions and trends as well as keyinternational initiatives taken to addresspriority issues. Graphics and boxes adaptedfrom GEO-3 provide more detailed insights.Also featured are representative examplesfrom the GEF's extensive portfolio of activitiesaround the world, to give an idea of theirbroad scope and practical orientation.

The Outlook section draws on GEO-3’sspecial analysis of four scenarios developedto take advance stock of some of theenvironmental implications of potentialpolicy reponses to current conditions,projected over the time horizon of the next30 years. As in foregoing sections, the GEFfocal areas form the basis for the selection ofnotional future situations presented in thistext.

The final section of the booklet brieflyhighlights the major outcomes of the WorldSummit on Sustainable Development asthey relate to the GEF activities and focalareas.

Perhaps the major message of both GEO-2000 and GEO-3 (and hence of thebooklet in hand) is that the environmentcontinues to deteriorate even thoughprogress is being made in many areas. As aresponse mechanism, the GEF has played amajor role in some of the success to date.Since the restructuring of the GEF in 1994,membership has grown to 171 countries andthere are more than 1 000 GEF-supportedprojects worldwide.

2 CHANGE AND CHALLENGE: A STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT BRIEFING FOR THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY

INTR

ODUC

TION

■ GLOBAL PERSPECTIVEIn its 2001 assessment of levels ofgreenhouse gases (GHGs) in theatmosphere, the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC) presented ‘newand stronger evidence that most of thewarming observed over the last 50 years isattributable to human activities’. The1990s are ‘very likely’ to have been thewarmest decade and 1998 the warmest yearsince records began in 1861. The rise of 10-20 cm in sea level over the past 100 yearsappears to be linked to a 0.6 (± 0.2) °Crise in air temperatures recorded over thesame period. Although CO2 accounts formore than 60 per cent of the additionalgreenhouse effect accumulated sinceindustrialization, the concentrations ofother greenhouse gases such as methane(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), halocarbonsand halons have also increased. Some ofthese gases are also ozone-depletingsubstances regulated under the MontrealProtocol (see Ozone section).

Greenhouse gas emissions are unevenlydistributed between countries and regions.In general, industrialized countries areresponsible for the majority of historicaland current emissions. For example, morethan half of all CO2 emissions in 1998came from the member countries of theOrganization for Economic Cooperationand Development (OECD), where averageper capita emissions were about three timesthe world average. Their share of globalCO2 emissions has, however, decreased byaround 11 per cent since 1973 anddeveloping countries are likely tocontribute up to 50 per cent of emissionsby 2035.

The impacts of global warming and climatechange will not be uniform. Some effectscould be beneficial for some regions.However, regional changes in climate havealready affected diverse physical andbiological systems in many parts of theworld. Mid- to high-latitude growingseasons have lengthened. Poleward andaltitudinal shifts of plant and animal rangeshave been observed. Natural systems at riskof climate change include glaciers, atolls,polar and alpine ecosystems, prairiewetlands and remnant native grasslands.

Even though the impact of climate changeon biodiversity to date remains unclear, the

increasing incidence of coral reef bleachingmay be a consequence of recent rises inglobal ocean temperature. Reports of coralbleaching have increased greatly since1989. The most significant mass bleachingwas associated with the 1997-98 El NiñoSouthern Oscillation (ENSO) event, whenall ten reef provinces of the world wereaffected. In some areas, most notably theIndian Ocean, this event was followed bymass mortality, where up to 90 per cent ofall the corals died over thousands of squarekilometres. Climate change also representsan important additional stress on someecosystems already affected by increasingresource demands, unsustainablemanagement practices and pollution. Itcan also be expected to reduce the ability ofsome environmental systems to provide, ona sustained basis, key goods and servicesneeded for successful economic and socialdevelopment, including adequate food,clean air and water, energy, safe shelter andlow levels of diseases. It has also beenimplicated in the decline of amphibians intropical montane forests and of some

populations of migratory birds because ofunfavourable variations in climaticconditions.

Systems that are vulnerable includeagriculture and forestry. Forests bothinfluence and are influenced by climatechange: they play an important role in theglobal carbon cycle, and their managementor destruction could significantly affect thecourse of global warming in this century. Ifprojected climate changes materialize, theimpacts on forests are likely to beregionally varied, dramatic and long-lasting, affecting both the distribution andcomposition of forests. Land degradation,floods, fires and droughts are expected toreduce crop yields and worsen food deficitsin many countries around the tropics andsub-tropics, where widespread povertyundermines people’s capacity to cope withchange. Climate change is also likely toaffect human health through changes inavailability of freshwater, and thedistribution of vector-borne diseases suchas malaria and dengue fever.

CLIMATE CHANGE 3

CLIMATE CHANGE

West Asia 187Africa 365

North America 1 614

Europe 1 677

Asia and the Pacific 2 167

Latin America and the Caribbean 223

World total 6 234

Carbon dioxide emissions by region, 1998

Anthropogenicgreenhouse gasemissions are unevenlydistributed betweenregions — mostemissions come fromindustrialized regions.Figures includeemissions from fuelconsumption, gas flaringand cement production

Source: compiled fromMarland, Boden andAndres 2001

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

300

310

1961

1965

1969

1973

1977

1981

1985

1989

1993

1997

2001

Carbon dioxide concentrations at Mauna Loa, Hawaii (parts per million by volume)

Records from MaunaLoa, Hawaii, show howCO2 concentrations haveincreased – the increaseis largely due toanthropogenic emissionsthat result from burningfossil fuel

Source: Keeling andWharf 2001


CLIM

ATE

CHAN

GE ■ AfricaAfrica contributes less than 3.5 per cent of global CO2 emissions with Northern and Southern Africa being responsible for 80 per cent of the region’s total.However, Africa is the most vulnerable region in terms of projected decreases in water and food security, because widespread poverty limits adaptivecapacity. The following are some of the projected climate change impacts on the region:

■ Current projections for sea level rise over the next century indicate that human settlements in the Gulf of Guinea, Senegal, Gambia, Egypt and along theEast African coast, including the Western Indian Ocean islands, would be at high risk of flooding and land recession.

■ Climatic variability and associated floods and droughts result in increased risks of crop failure, reducing food security and leading to higher incidences ofmalnutrition and disease.

■ Grain yields would decrease for many IPCC scenarios, diminishing food security, particularly in small food-importing countries.

■ Desertification would be exacerbated by reductions in average annual rainfall, run-off and soil moisture, especially in Southern, Northern and Western Africa.

■ Significant extinctions of plant and animal species would occur, affecting rural livelihoods, tourism and genetic resources.

■ Asia and the PacificAsia is a leading source among developing regions of CO2 emissions from human or associated sources and almost half the world’s total methaneemissions originate in South Asia. Northwest Pacific and East Asia sub-regions, and the Pacific Island countries will be particularly vulnerable to sea levelrise because many of their human settlements and industrial facilities are located in coastal or lowland areas. Some of the likely climate change impactsinclude the following:

■ Dramatic impacts from extreme weather events can be expected on terrestrial biodiversity, subsistence cropping and forest food sources in the smallPacific island developing states.

■ Decreases in agricultural productivity and aquaculture due to thermal and water stress, sea-level rise, floods and droughts, and tropical cyclones woulddiminish food security in many countries of arid, tropical and temperate Asia; agriculture would expand and productivity would increase in northern areas.

■ Climate change would exacerbate existing threats to biodiversity due to habitat loss and population pressure in Asia.

■ Some species with restricted climatic niches and which are unable to migrate due to fragmentation of the landscape, soil differences or topography couldbecome endangered or extinct.

Climate change – regional highlights

■ EuropeAlthough many European countries are enthusiastic proponents of the global climate change treaty, the region is still a major emitter of anthropogenicgreenhouse gases. Most CO2 emissions are from fossil fuel burning, mainly for energy generation. In 1990-2000, emission levels fell by 8 per cent in ninecountries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), thanks partly to reforms but also because of recession and declining industrial output. Even so, Europe willstruggle to achieve reductions prescribed in the Kyoto Protocol. Climate change is projected to have some positive effects on agriculture in Northern Europebut productivity would decrease in Southern and Eastern Europe.

■ Latin America and the CaribbeanThe region is the source of 10 per cent of global anthropogenic emissions and nearly half the world’s total CO2 emissions arising from land-use change,especially deforestation. Intentional biomass burning to convert land to other uses accounts for part of this output. Many low-lying small Caribbean islandsare at risk of sea level rise, along with parts of Latin America’s largest coastal cities. Changes in the water cycle may pose a danger to arid and semi-aridzones, affecting the production of cereals and livestock as well as hydroelectric power generation. Another likely impact of climate change is the rapidspread into new areas of malaria and other epidemic disease vectors. There is plentiful yet largely unrealized scope for renewable energy and more settingaside of forests as carbon sinks. Other threats due to climate change, include the following:

■ Yields of important crops would decrease in many locations in Latin America, even when the effects of increased CO2 are taken into account;subsistence farming in some regions of Latin America could be threatened.

■ The rate of biodiversity loss would increase.

■ West AsiaSea level rise is expected to have a damaging impact on island countries such as Bahrain and on several low-lying coastal areas around the ArabianPeninsula. Changes in the pattern of temperature and rainfall are likely to accelerate desertification and reduce food production in many parts of the region.Per capita CO2 emissions increased in West Asia from 4.7 tonnes a year in 1972 to 7.4 tonnes a year in 1998, reflecting trends in population growth andin agricultural and industrial development. In some countries, such as Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, CO2 emissions fell from previously highlevels, in response to clean air laws and introduction of cleaner energy and industrial processes.

CLIMATE CHANGE 5

CLIMATE CHANGE

Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, Africa’s highestmountain, has lost 82 per cent of the ice cap ithad when first surveyed in 1912 and some55 per cent of the glaciers it had in 1962, as aresult of regional warming effects believed to belinked to global warming.

Map shows the extent of the glacier in 1962(yellow outline, based on geological survey) andin 2000 (black outline, based on Landsatimagery and aerial survey).

Snows of Kilimanjaro shrinking

Landsat data: USGS/EROS Data CenterPhotographs: Christian Lambrechts, UNF/UNEP/KWS/Universityof Bayneuth/WCST

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTIONThe international community has advancedclimate and atmosphere agendas withnotable determination. The UN FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),which was adopted in 1992, called forindustrialized countries to return to 1990emission levels of CO2 and other greenhousegases by the year 2000. Now the KyotoProtocol to UNFCCC, adopted in December1997, has set definite greenhouse gasreduction targets for most industrializedcountries, including an 8 per cent reductionbelow 1990 levels for the EU and manyCentral European countries within agreedtime limits. The decision taken by theUnited States in 2001 to withdraw itscommitment to greenhouse gas emissioncuts agreed in the Kyoto Protocol, did notprevent other developed countries fromsetting more detailed rules for emissionsreduction at a conference in Bonn in July2001. They also agreed upon ways to boostimplementation of UNFCCC, including anundertaking to provide new assistance ofUS$410 million a year by 2005 forimplementing UNFCCC in developingcountries. No new reduction targets were setfor developing countries but the Protocoloffers mechanisms whereby industrializedcountries can invest in measures that limitgreenhouse gas emissions in developingcountries in return for emission creditsallowing less stringent emission reductionsat home.

Some issues not settled at Bonn werefinalized at the seventh Conference of theParties in October and November 2001 inMarrakesh, Morocco, including a compliancesystem and procedures for accounting,reporting and reviewing information. Theresulting Marrakesh Accords paved the way toa comprehensive, multilateral approach toclimate negotiations that is expected tobolster future international responses toclimate and atmosphere issues. Among othermultilateral actions and regional trendsrelating to climate issues are:

■ National communications to the UNFCCCfrom 13 African countries providingdetailed inventories of carbon emissionsand sinks, and a waste managementblueprint for South Africa designed tocurb solid waste dumping and burning;

■ Steps by countries involved in the AsiaLeast Cost Greenhouse Gas Abatementproject, backed by the GEF and UNDP, toreduce emissions in the energy sector; and

■ Detailed national inventories of GHGscompleted by three West Asian countries.

Initiated through the World Bank in 1997, an ongoing project supported by the GEF in Sri Lanka haspiloted installation of solar home power generation systems in rural areas lacking access to gridelectricity. A trusted national microfinance provider, Sarvodaya, issues loans that enable participantsto buy the systems and have them installed under credit agreements that also include a 10-yearwarranty for the photovoltaic module that collects the solar energy. A one-year warranty for thesystem as a whole and a maintenance service for the first three years, also form part of the deal.Sarvodaya pays the supplier and assumes responsibility for repayment and collections.

The project has also supported private sector participation in grid elecricity generation and hasbacked mini-hydro schemes and wind farm projects in addition to solar home systems. By June2001, some 7 000 rural households around Sri Lanka had been electrified thanks to the project,generating additional capacity amounting to 345 KW.

From the GEF portfolio: Boosting renewable power access and use in Sri Lanka

The protection of the Earth’s stratosphericozone layer has presented one of the majorchallenges over the past 30 years, spanningthe fields of environment, trade, internationalcooperation and sustainable development.Ozone layer depletion has now reachedrecord levels, especially over the Antarctic andrecently also in the Arctic. Current averageozone losses are 6 per cent in the northernmid-latitudes in winter and spring, 5 per centin southern mid-latitudes all year round, 50per cent in the Antarctic spring and 15 percent in the Arctic spring. The resultingincreases in harmful ultraviolet irradiationamount to 7 per cent, 6 per cent, 130 per centand 22 per cent respectively.

Ozone depletion is caused by a number ofchemicals known as ozone-depletingsubstances (ODS), the most notorious ofwhich are the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).ODS were mainly used in refrigerators, airconditioners, aerosol sprays, insulating andfurniture foams, and firefighting equipment,and their production peaked in the late 1980sas the demand for such goods grew. Ozonedepleting halocarbons also contribute some14 per cent to the overall global warmingeffect of GHGs.

Levels of chlorine in the atmosphere are stillincreasing, although at a steadily slowingrate thanks to measures being taken underthe Montreal Protocol. Some of the regionalimpacts of ozone layer depletion include:

■ A roughly 10 per cent per decade rise inultraviolet radiation in Australia and NewZealand, reducing by 20 per cent the timeit takes for exposed skin to be sunburnt;

■ A measurable 50 per cent decline in thethickness of the ozone layer over parts ofnorthern Europe in winter and spring; and

■ A record expansion of the Antarctic ozonehole to over 28 million km2 in September2000.

Other regions where ozone layer depletioncauses special concern are the countries ofsouthern Latin America and northernmostNorth America.

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTIONInternational cooperation has been the keyto protecting the stratospheric ozone layer.Nations agreed in principle to tackle aglobal problem before its effects becameevident or its existence scientifically proven.In 1975, the UNEP Governing Councilcalled for a meeting to coordinate activitieson protecting the ozone layer. ACoordinating Committee on the Ozone Layerwas established the following year toundertake an annual scientific review. Strictcurbs on ODS production and consumptionin Canada and the United States during the1980s set the pace for concertedinternational action. Negotiations eventuallyled to the Vienna Convention for theProtection of the Ozone Layer, which wasfinally agreed upon by 28 countries inMarch 1985.

By December 2001, 182 Parties had ratifiedthe Vienna Convention and 181 the MontrealProtocol on Substances that Deplete theOzone Layer. The protocol originally requiredonly a 50 per cent cut in consumption of fivewidely used CFCs by the end of 1999 and ahalt in consumption of three halons.Subsequent amendments meant that by2000, 96 ozone-depleting substances (ODS)were subject to such controls.

World production of major CFCsProduction has declined sharply sincepeaking around 1998 but impacts will takelonger to ease off.

World production of the three ozone-depleting CFCs in widest use peaked around1998 and has since tailed off to very lowvalues. Almost every party to the MontrealProtocol has now taken measures to phaseout ODS with the result that, by 2000, thetotal consumption of ODS had been reducedby 85 per cent. Recent breakthroughs haveincluded an end to all ODS production inthe Russian Federation by December 2000and significant phasing out of ODSproduction and use in CEE countries. A 21per cent cut in CFC production has beenachieved in Latin America and theCaribbean and total phase-out in Brazil.New legislation for phase-out is now inplace in Argentina, Mexico and Venezuela.China and India are the largest producers ofCFCs in the Asia and the Pacific region.China has made a commitment to phaseout consumption of ODS by 2010.

Some CFC molecules can persist in theatmosphere for as long as 100 years and thelong-term measures being taken can onlysucceed if all countries continue to honourtheir treaty commitments. Some traffickingand unlicensed use of new (not recycled)CFCs has been reported, ranging from20 000 to 30 000 tonnes a year. Thethinning of the ozone layer threatenshuman health through diseases such as skincancer, eye cataracts and immunedeficiency; affects flora and fauna; and alsoinfluences the planet’s climate.


OZON

E LA

YER

DEPL

ETIO

N The Antarctic ozone hole

The Multilateral Fund

The Montreal Protocol provides a 10-yearperiod of grace for developing countries tomarshal phase-out measures. It also providesa financial mechanism to meet the costs ofsuch measures. By 2000, the Multilateral Fundto the Montreal Protocol had disbursed morethan US$1.1 thousand million for capacitybuilding and projects to phase out ODS in114 developing countries. The GEF hasprovided additional funding for similarmeasures in CEE countries not eligible forMultilateral Fund support.

In September 2000 the hole reached a record size of28.3 million km2, three times the area of the US

Source: NASA 2001

■ GLOBAL PERSPECTIVEA total of 261 river basins, covering 45.3 percent of the Earth’s total land area (excludingAntarctica), are shared by two or morecountries. The principal sources of water forhuman use are lakes, rivers, soil moistureand relatively shallow groundwater aquifers.About 2 billion people, approximately one-third of the world’s population, depend ongroundwater which supplies about 20 percent of global water withdrawals annually.Many rural dwellers depend entirely ongroundwater. Wetlands, which are animportant freshwater ecosystem influencingspecies distribution and biodiversity as wellas human settlements and activities, maycover at least 12.8 million km2 globally.

Human activities, including agriculture andsettlements, have caused serious damage tofreshwater ecosystems and contributed to theloss of about 50 per cent of the world’swetlands during the 20th century. A 1992review of Ramsar sites showed that 84 per centwere either threatened or experiencingecological changes. About 60 per cent of theworld’s largest 227 rivers have been strongly ormoderately fragmented by dams, diversions orcanals. While this infrastructure has resulted inincreased food production and hydroelectricity,it has also displaced millions of people indifferent parts of the world and causedirreversible damage to associated ecosystems.

The damage to ecosystems reduces waterquality and quantity, leading to a reduction inthe effective availability of water for humanuse. According to the World Commission on

Water, more than half of the world’s majorrivers are ‘seriously depleted and polluted,degrading and poisoning the surroundingecosystems, threatening the health andlivelihood of people who depend on them’.Sources of pollution include untreatedsewage, chemical discharges, petroleum leaksand spills, dumping in old mines and pits,and agricultural chemicals that are washedoff or seep into the ground from farm fields.

Groundwater resources are vulnerable to avariety of threats, including overuse andcontamination. When use exceeds naturalrecharge over a long period, groundwaterlevels drop. Overpumping of groundwatercan lead to salt-water intrusion in coastalareas. In Madras, India, for example,saltwater intrusion has moved 10 kminland, contaminating wells.

INTERNATIONAL WATERS 7

INTERNATIONAL WATERS

Africa

North andCentral

America

SouthAmerica

Asia

Europe 71

53

38

39

60

Numbers of international river basins

Note: the Jurado, shared byColombia and Panama, isincluded in South America

Source: Wolf and others 1999

<1.0

1.0 to 2.0

>2.0 to 5.0

>5.0 to 10.0

>10.0 to 20.0

>20.0

catastrophically low

very low

low

medium

high

very high

Water availability by sub-region in 2000 (1 000 m3 per capita/year)

Map shows water availability measured in terms of 1 000 m3 per capita/year

Source: compiled from UNDP, UNEP, World Bank and WRI 2000 and United Nations Population Division 2001

The GEF agenda

The GEF agenda for international waterspromotes a cross-sectoral approach toaddressing environmental problems throughthree broad programme areas:

■ Restoring waterbodies;

■ Integrated land and water resourcemanagement; and

■ Contaminant reduction.

Between 1991 and 2001, the GEF allocatedUS $0.46 billion to 60 projects, mainlyregional or global in scope, contributingsignificantly to the implementation of globaland regional agreements on the protection andrestoration of freshwater and marine systems.


INTE

RNAT

IONA

L W

ATER

S International waters – regional highlights

■ AfricaAfrica experiences large spatial variations in rainfall, with 95 per cent of the total falling in the central and southwestern wet equatorial zone. Severedroughts have been recorded in the Sahel and in the Northern, Eastern and Southern subregions over the past 30 years. Water stress is widespread and onthe increase in many countries, undermining food security and human and animal health. In places, large volumes of river water are moved between basinsto even out supply disparities. In South Africa, for example, inter-basin transfers of water from high-rainfall areas to large urban centres have tended toleave downstream habitats and farms dry and depleted. In the Seychelles and Mauritius, impressive water savings have been achieved throughdesalination, rationing and wastewater recycling. Coastal and marine habitats are under pressure from mining of sand dunes, clearing of mangroves, coralextraction, tourist resort development and commercial overkill of fish, crustacean and shellfish stocks. In Southern Africa, the annual fish catch per capitafell from nearly 30 kg in 1972 to less than 10 kg in 1998. The catch level has remained at a standstill elsewhere, suggesting fully exploited stocks ratherthan conservation advances, though catch limits and marine reserves are being introduced in some waters.

■ Latin America and the CaribbeanIrrigated farming has spread rapidly in recent decades but many state-run irrigation systems have proved wasteful and inefficient. Transfer of ownership towater user groups has improved standards in Mexico and elsewhere. In South America, especially in Argentina and Brazil, a large proportion of waterwithdrawals is used for industry, mostly by the energy, mining and petroleum sectors. Domestic supplies fall short in many areas (both urban and rural) andclean water supplies and sanitation are still unavailable to many. Agricultural wastes and industrial discharges are key sources of water pollution. Untreatedurban sewage is a problem in and around big cities. Oil and gas industry activities pose a conspicuous threat to marine and coastal ecosystems and urbangrowth and tourism infrastructure have physically altered coastal areas. Several oil pollution incidents in the past 30 years have led to tighter regulation.Overexploitation of fisheries resources and the problems of by-catch and discards have become features of the regional fisheries regime. The catch fromthe region’s seas has generally increased over the past 30 years. From 1985 to 1995, many South American countries doubled or tripled their catch, andColombia’s catch increased five-fold. However, in 1998 the regional catch dropped considerably to 11.3 million tonnes (15.9 per cent of the global total),due to adverse climatic factors caused by the El Niño.

■ West AsiaIn countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), petroleum industry operations and desalination plants are significant marine pollution hazards. In theMashriq, the main threat is from rivers that discharge urban wastes and agricultural or industrial chemicals into the sea. About 1.2 million barrels of oil arespilled in the region every year from ballast water discharges in the ROPME Sea Area (Regional Convention for Cooperation on the Protection of the MarineEnvironment from Pollution), Red Sea and Mediterranean. Dredging and land reclamation works are degrading habitats along the western coasts ofcountries in the ROPME Sea Area. Regional conflicts have complicated the search for solutions to these and other problems. A rapid shift of populationsfrom rural to urban (mainly coastal) areas has added to the pressures. Freshwater sources are scarce and water stress is ubiquitous. Agriculture accountsfor over 80 per cent of water consumption. Groundwater pumping has lowered water tables and led to saltwater intrusion in some coastal areas. Severalcountries still lack integrated water management plans. River-sharing has made some progress under three regional action plans but disputes linger.Completion of new dams in Turkey currently threatens to affect water quality and quantity in the Euphrates River, which flows into Syria and Iraq, and feedsthe farmlands and estuaries of the Shatt-al-Arab.

■ Asia and the PacificMany countries have taken steps to introduce integrated water resources management policy reforms and regulatory frameworks. There has been strikingprogress too, with water-sharing pacts between South Asian countries, such as the Indus Basin accord between India and Pakistan, and the Water SharingTreaty between Bangladesh and India. Yet China’s Yellow River, India’s Ganges and Central Asia’s Amu and Syr Darya are still rated the world’s mostpolluted rivers. Coastal and marine resources such as fisheries, mangroves and coral reefs are also under pressure from pollution and from intrusive urbanand tourism development. Fisheries decline has prompted many countries to turn to aquaculture to improve production and retain export markets. In severalcases, fresh problems have arisen, such as salinization of irrigation water and clearing of mangroves. Another emerging threat is the introduction ofinvasive species like the black-striped mussel into vulnerable marine habitats such as seagrass beds in the Pacific.

■ EuropeParts of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Mediterranean countries suffer water stress, but Europe as a whole is rich in water. Water quality andpollution concerns centre on nitrate overload in agricultural soils, and phosphorus from domestic and industrial wastewater running off into seas, lakes,rivers and groundwater. In some CEE countries, use of nitrogen-phosphorus fertilizers has been steadily curtailed and wastewater treatment increased sincethe 1990s but groundwater pollution remains a stubborn problem in some areas. Over 2 700 groundwater sources around the Russian Federation wereidentified as polluted in 1999. Pollution and other agents of marine and coastal degradation have levelled off and lessened in a few places during the pastdecade. But the waters of the Adriatic, the Black Sea, the Baltic and other closed or semi-closed seas remain prone to a range of pollution dangers fromshipping and land-based sources.

About one-third of the world’s populationlives in countries suffering from moderate-to-high water stress - where waterconsumption is more than 10 per cent ofrenewable freshwater resources. Some 80countries, which are home to 40 per cent ofthe world’s population, were suffering fromserious water shortages by the mid-1990s.The three major factors causing increasedwater demand over the past century werepopulation growth, industrial developmentand the expansion of irrigated agriculture.

One of the greatest environmental threats tohealth for many of the world’s poorerpopulations, remains the continued use ofuntreated water. While the percentage ofpeople served with improved water suppliesincreased from 4.1 billion in 1990 to 4.9billion in 2000, 1.1 billion people still lackaccess to safe drinking water and 2.4 billionlack access to improved sanitation. Most ofthese people are in Africa and Asia. Lack ofaccess to safe water supply and sanitationresults in hundreds of millions of cases ofwater-related diseases, and more than5 million deaths every year.

The GEF focal area of international waters isalso concerned with aquatic biodiversity,particularly with regard to invasive species.Invasive species have been a major threat tonative species through the effects ofpredation, alteration of habitat or disruptionof ecosystem processes. Notable aquaticexamples include the introduction of thepredatory Nile perch Lates niloticus to Lake

Victoria around 30 years ago, whichcontributed to the apparent extinction of250 endemic species of cichlid fishes. InEastern and Southern Africa, the widespreadinvasion of the water hyacinth (Eichhorniacrassipes) is a contributor to deterioratingwater quality and blocks water channels,disrupting flow patterns. The number ofaquatic introductions rose rapidly during

the second half of the 20th century.

In many coastal areas, mounting pressurefrom overcrowding, urbanization, industrialoperations, tourism and agricultural run-offhas degraded habitats and resources on landand offshore. Sewage is the most prevalentsource of marine contamination and coastaldischarges of untreated sewage haveescalated during the past 30 years. Risinglevels of nitrogen pollution fromagricultural and other sources have causedblooms of toxic phytoplankton and othersigns of marine and coastal watereutrophication. More and more areas arebeing affected and at increasing frequency,most notably in enclosed or semi-enclosedseas such as the Black Sea. The natural flowof sediment between land and sea has beenaltered, mainly by expansion of urban andindustrial infrastructure. These changes areanother significant threat to vulnerablecoastal habitats.

The GEO-3 overview of global conditionsconcluded that ‘overall, coastal and marinedegradation not only continues but hasintensified’ apart from progress on‘relatively few issues in relatively few, mostlydeveloped countries’.

INTERNATIONAL WATERS 9

INTERNATIONAL WATERS

From the GEF portfolio: Bermejo River Basin management

Implemented by UNEP and supported by GEF funds, this project has helped Bolivia and Argentina co-manage the shared waters of the Bermejo River and its basin. A strategic action programme (SAP)has been developed, based on analysis of the results of fact-finding investigations into suchtransboundary issues as accelerated sedimentation from soil erosion, and massive surges of waterthat can cause flooding far downstream. Government agencies, local communities and NGOs fromboth sides of the border have worked together towards a shared understanding of problems, causesand possible solutions. Solutions that show promise of economic and ecological sustainability havebeen put to the test in pilot demonstrations in which local people participate very actively. Differentstakeholders also participate in workshops that range from local to bi-national in scope. Amongdevelopments from the 1997-1999 project are that:

■ The necessary institutional, legal and information management foundations are now in place forenhancing and restoring environmental quality throughout the river basin;

■ Protecting the basin’s natural resources and ecosystems is now a feasible prospect and therequired planning and financial instruments, human resources and skills to achieve this over theSAP’s 20-year timeframe have been identified or already exist; and

■ The comprehensive, cross-border and participatory character of the project offers a potentiallyvaluable model for river sharing efforts in other parts of Latin America.

From the GEF portfolio: Saving the Danube and Black Sea from nutrient pollution

Pollution by nitrates and other nutrient chemicals and wastes discharged from human sources suchas farms, towns and factories is a priority concern of the 17 countries that border the River Danubeand Black Sea. Since 1991, a succession of projects funded by the GEF and activated by UNDP,UNEP and World Bank, has identified nutrient pollution as the main factor behind eutrophication andother quality problems affecting these shared waters. Wildlife, human and animal health, ecosystems,biodiversity, economic activities and natural resources are all adversely affected. A strategic actionprogramme that combines the outcomes of foregoing investigations, analyses and consultations hasevolved out of this web of activity. It specifies policy, legal and institutional reforms and financialmeasures required to tackle nutrient pollution at source and reduce nutrients to balanced levels.Countries involved in the programme are now in a position to commit to:

■ Adopting and implementing pollution prevention steps to reduce discharges, restore nutrient ‘sinks’and clean up or head off potential toxic ‘hot spots’;

■ Capping nutrient releases to the Black Sea at 1997 levels; and

■ Agreeing reduction goals to be formalized in protocols or annexes to the Danube and Black Seaconventions.

In addition, the European Union, GEF implementing agencies and other donors will raise existingcommitments to toxic nutrient reduction to greater prominence in their programmes. Private sector,NGO and community-based projects will pilot techniques for reducing non-point source pollution andrestoring nutrient balance through integrated land management and water managementpartnerships. Nutrient reduction efforts in individual countries, backed by a GEF and World BankInvestment Fund, will focus on wetlands restoration, wastewater treatment and curbs on agriculturalpollution. UNDP and UNEP will implement a technical assistance programme for regional capacitybuilding around Black Sea shores and a matching component for the Danube basin will beimplemented by UNDP alone. Mechanisms have also been set in place to facilitate cooperation andcoordination between agencies and governments.

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTIONWhile shared rivers can be a source ofconflict due to competition, they can alsoencourage greater internationalcooperation. This is particularly evidenttoday with the increase in the number ofinitiatives related to river basinmanagement regimes and institutionscommitted to bilateral and/or multilateralmanagement of transboundary waterresources. In 1966, the Helsinki Rules, laidthe foundation for international principlesfor shared watercourses and influencedmany specific river treaties. The Rules weresubsequently followed up by variousinternational efforts, including the work ofthe UN International Law Commission,which led in 1997 to the United NationsConvention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of InternationalWatercourses.

The International Network of BasinOrganizations (INBO) was set up in 1996. By1998, INBO had 125 member organizationsin 49 countries. Among other things, itpromotes sustainable development of riverbasins, development of improved humanresources and tools for managing waterresources, and better retrieval and sharing ofinformation and practical know-how.

Concern over growing problems related togroundwater resources has galvanized theinternational community, governments andother stakeholders to start addressing them.For example, the Second World WaterForum at The Hague in March 2000organized a special workshop ongroundwater. Some of the recommendationsarising from the workshop included theneed to raise public awareness and ‘improveinformation availability, quality andaccessibility to stakeholders, technicalspecialists and policy-makers’.

One of the earliest comprehensive waterconferences was held in 1977 in Mar delPlata, Argentina. The focus on human needsled to the International Drinking WaterSupply and Sanitation Decade (1981-90) andefforts of the United Nations and otherinternational organizations to provide basicwater services. The concept of meeting basicwater needs was reaffirmed during the 1992Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro andexpanded to include ecological water needs. Adeclaration issued by ministers attending theSecond World Water Forum, stated seven keychallenges of the new century (see boxabove) that will need to be tackled if thisdismal and unequal situation is to be turnedaround.

The Global Programme of Action for theProtection of the Marine Environment fromLand-based Activities, adopted in 1995,recognizes the fundamental physicallinkages between land use, freshwatersources, river basins, coastal zones andoceans, requiring an integrated approachto achieve sustainable management.Projected climate change impacts haveadded urgency to this need. In addition tothe Global Programme of Action and itsregional offspring, the UN Convention onthe Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which nowhas 136 parties, is a key umbrellaagreement encompassing a wide range ofmaritime concerns, includingenvironmental protection.

Agreements that respond specifically tomarine and coastal pollution issues includethe London Dumping Convention (1972)and its Protocol of 1996, the 1989 BaselConvention on the Control of TransboundaryMovement of Hazardous Wastes and theirDisposal, and the Convention on thePrevention of Pollution from Ships(MARPOL). An array of regional seasprogrammes, action plans andaccompanying regional conventionscontinues to provide a framework foreffective environmental problem-solving andcooperation between maritime countries.

Recognition of the special needs of smallisland developing states led to the adoptionin 1994 of the Barbados Programme ofAction on the Sustainable Development ofSmall Island States. Global agreementsaimed at sustainable fisheries exploitationinclude an Agreement on the Conservationand Management of Straddling and HighlyMigratory Fish Stocks, adopted in 1995, andthe Code of Conduct for ResponsibleFisheries developed by FAO.

Since 1998, the GEF has funded a GlobalInternational Waters Assessment (GIWA)project, looking into action priorities andways to frame sustainable solutions to waterproblems at national, regional and globallevels. GIWA will provide a systematichealth-check on environmental conditionsand problems (including their socialcauses) in transboundary water bodies,including marine and coastal areas.


INTE

RNAT

IONA

L W

ATER

S Managing water wisely

Some 120 ministers of water attending theSecond World Water Forum held at The Haguein March 2000 adopted a declaration aimed atachieving world water security. The declarationnoted the following as the main challenges ofthis new century:

■ Meeting basic needs: to recognize thataccess to safe and sufficient water andsanitation are basic human needs and areessential to health and well-being, and toempower people, especially women, through aparticipatory process of water management.

■ Securing the food supply: to enhance foodsecurity, particularly of the poor andvulnerable, through the more efficientmobilization and use, and the more equitableallocation of water for food production.

■ Protecting ecosystems: to ensure theintegrity of ecosystems through sustainablewater resources management.

■ Sharing water resources: to promotepeaceful cooperation and develop synergies

between different uses of water at all levels,whenever possible, within and, in the case ofboundary and transboundary waterresources, between states concerned,through sustainable river basin managementor other appropriate approaches.

■ Managing risks: to provide security fromfloods, droughts, pollution and other water-related hazards.

■ Valuing water: to manage water in a way thatreflects its economic, social, environmental andcultural values for all its uses, and to movetowards pricing water services to reflect thecost of their provision. This approach shouldtake account of the need for equity and thebasic needs of the poor and the vulnerable.

■ Governing water wisely: to ensure goodgovernance, so that the involvement of thepublic and the interests of all stakeholdersare included in the management of waterresources.

Source: World Water Forum 2000

■ GLOBAL PERSPECTIVEBiodiversity is defined in GEO-3 as the‘variability among living organisms from allsources, including terrestrial, marine andother aquatic ecosystems, and the ecologicalcomplexes of which they are part,[including] diversity within species (geneticdiversity), between species and ofecosystems’. The database maintained bythe Committee on Recently ExtinctOrganisms lists 58 fish species and onemammal species recorded as extinct between1970 and 2002, while assessments byBirdLife International indicate that ninebird species became extinct during thisperiod. Extinctions among less studiedgroups are not accurately known. Theconcern is that the current rate of extinctionis many times higher than the ‘background’rate that has persisted over long periods ofgeological time (one bird or mammalspecies lost only every 500 to 1 000 years).

There is a clear link between biodiversityand human well-being. People rely on wildplants and animals for medicines and cropgenetic resources. Of the world’s 25 mostsought-after drugs in 1997, 10 originated asnatural substances. Healthcare for over 75per cent of people worldwide means relianceon traditional medicines extracted directlyfrom nature. Food security too, can hingeon biodiversity, in addition to the value ofhaving a wild gene pool. Biodiversity alsoprovides vital environmental services that

are hard to quantify and often overlooked.Fewer species and conversion of naturalareas could mean reduced environmentalservices because resources such as energy,water and nutrients are retained in greateramounts by more diverse ecosystems.Species diversity may also help buffernatural ecosystems against adverse impactsof human activity.

In a recent global survey, habitat loss wasfound to be the principal factor affecting 83per cent of threatened mammals and 85 percent of threatened birds. Habitat modificationarises from many different types of land usechange, including agricultural development,logging, dam construction, mining andurban development. Over the past 30 years,land conversion has been more intensive intropical regions than elsewhere and remainsthe principal driver of biodiversity loss.Worldwide about 1.2 million km2 of landhave been converted to cropland during thisperiod. Forests, which support at least half theworld’s natural biodiversity, have borne themost conspicuous losses. FAO data show thatbetween 1980 and 1995 forest cover indeveloping countries shrank by an estimated2 million km2 – an average annual loss of130 000 km2. Species-rich habitats such asthe tropical dry forests of Central Americahave virtually disappeared. Other ecosystemsthat have come under heavy pressure fromhuman activities leading to loss of habitat,habitat quality and species diversity arecoral reefs, wetlands and other freshwater,marine and coastal ecosystems.

Other important direct drivers of biodiversityloss include climate change, pollution, over-harvesting of natural resources and the

introduction of exotic species. Keyunderlying causes include humanpopulation growth, unsustainableconsumption habits, increasing productionof waste and pollutants, urban development,international conflict and continuinginequities in the distribution of wealth andresources. On islands, introductions of alienspecies have been the most significant directcause of extinction. In the past 200 years,Australia has lost more mammalian speciesthan all the rest of the world, largely owingto introductions of placental mammals,which have become predators andcompetitors to the endemic marsupials.

BIODIVERSITY 11

BIODIVERSITYMammals Birds Reptiles Amphibians Fishes Total

Africa 294 217 47 17 148 723

Asia and 526 523 106 67 247 1 469 the Pacific

Europe 82 54 31 10 83 260

Latin America 275 361 77 28 132 873 and Caribbean

North America 51 50 27 24 117 269

West Asia 0 24 30 8 9 71

Polar 0 6 7 0 1 14

Note: ‘Threatened species’ include those categorized by IUCN in 2000 as Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable (Hilton-Taylor2000); adding totals for each region does not give a global total because a species may be threatened in more than one region

Source: compiled from the IUCN Red List database (Hilton-Taylor 2000) and the UNEP-WCMC species database (UNEP-WCMC 2001a)

Globally threatened vertebrate species by region

The GEF biodiversity agenda

Between 1991 and 2001, the GEF allocatedapproximately US$1.4 billion for conservationand sustainable use of biodiversity resourcesaround the world and leveraged US $2.8billion in co-financing. This funding isdistributed among 470 projects in developingcountries and countries with economies intransition (CEITs) in four types of ecosystems:arid and semi-arid, coastal and freshwater,forest, and mountain. The projects supportdiverse activities to promote conservation,encourage sustainable use of resources, andenhance the sharing of benefits at local,national, and global levels. In addition, theseprojects have supported the Convention onBiological Diversity in areas such as alieninvasive species, biosafety, taxonomy, WorldHeritage sites, and indigenous communities.

GMOs, biotechnology and biosafety

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) andthe biotechnology industry in general couldplay a large part in increasing agriculturalyields and enhancing food security throughoutthe world. But there is consumer scepticismin some countries about the motivation ofGMO developers and the efficacy ofsafeguards against potential hazards such asgenetic transfers between introduced GMcrops and native plants, with possibleimpacts on biodiversity, plant health or humanhealth. Adopted in January 2000, theCartagena Protocol on Biosafety wasdeveloped as a subsidiary agreement to theConvention on Biological Diversity to ensurethat recipient countries have adequateopportunity and capacity to assess thepotential hazards of cross-border trade oraccidental releases of GMOs.


BIOD

IVER

SITY

Biodiversity – regional highlights

■ AfricaAfrica is famous for the richness of its wildlife and the diversity of its ecosystems, including the world’s most species-rich desert, the Succulent Karoo, andfour other areas internationally recognized as ‘biodiversity hot spots’. Natural biodiversity in Africa’s forests, wetlands and plains underpins local subsistenceuses. Wildlife tourism, a vital source of foreign exchange in many countries, is no less essential. Some 70 per cent of wild plant species in North Africa areused as medicines, food and forage or as part of agroforestry systems and many are put to more than one use. Habitat loss and degradation posesignificant threats to biodiversity, especially in dryland areas. In humid areas, the bushmeat trade has also had a damaging impact. Up to 50 per cent ofwetlands in Southern Africa have been degraded by draining for agricultural or urban development, pollution by effluent discharges and other causes.Building livelihoods that reconcile human needs with biodiversity can be difficult for people who depend on natural resources for subsistence. In someplaces, armed conflict and natural disasters exacerbate this problem, as coping mechanisms may undermine efforts to manage ecosystems responsibly.Elsewhere, however, dramatic successes have been scored. Conservation in the Western Indian Ocean islands, for instance, enabled Mauritian kestrel andpink pigeon populations to recover from single figures to several hundreds each in recent years.

■ Latin America and the CaribbeanThe region contains seven of the world’s 25 biodiversity hot spots and many highly productive rivers, lakes and marine ecosystems. Seven per cent of theworld’s coral reefs are found in the Caribbean. Cloud forests and other humid montane forests rank among the most threatened habitat types in the regionand are also home to many wild relatives and gene pools of crops such as potatoes, maize and beans. Lowland tropical rainforests have also been a primefocus of conservation concern. The forests of eastern coastal Brazil are among the most endangered habitats on earth. The most species-rich habitat in theworld, the Brazilian Amazon has been converted to agriculture and other uses across large parts of its original natural extent, a process often spearheadedby logging, mining and road building projects. An underlying pressure on the Amazon has been a tenfold increase in the region’s human population since1960. Illegal trade in plants and animals is a significant threat to biodiversity in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Peru and elsewhere. In some countries, permits tocapture and market certain animals have been granted to private operators in line with CITES recommendations and national legislation.

■ West AsiaThe seas around West Asia are rich in marine species but are at risk from pollution, including oil spills and discharges of untreated urban wastes. Otherpressures include sand dredging, ocean warming and invasions of non-indigenous species.Terrestrial biodiversity abounds in hot spots like the SocotraIslands off Yemen and many migratory birds cross the region and feed or breed in its wetlands and wilderness areas. Drainage and water extraction havedegraded many wetlands and watercourses, including the famed lower Mesopotamia marshlands. Mammals and birds are hunted to excess in many partsof the region. Schemes for captive breeding and reintroduction of Arabian oryx, Houbara bustard and certain gazelle species have been set up andmaintained in Jordan, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Syria. Most West Asian countries have ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and some haveratified CITES. Many also adhere to requirements of regional agreements, such as MAP (the Mediterranean Action Plan) or the Regional Organization for theProtection of the Environment of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA).

■ Asia and the PacificThe region supports a very high level of species diversity. In the belt linking the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas alone up to 25 000 plant species grow, 10per cent of the world total. Two previously unclassified large mammal species, an ox and a deer, have been discovered recently in Viet Nam and Laos. Manyspecies confined to oceanic islands in the region have fallen prone to extinction and those that survive in these isolated habitats continue to run a high risk,especially birds and molluscs. Habitat loss is the main pressure but introductions of invasive non-native species and unsustainable harvesting are importantsubsidiary causes. For example, a carnivorous snail introduced from Florida onto Moorea, French Polynesia, to help control the giant African land snail,preyed on several native endemic species of snail to the point of extinction of all seven in the wild. Some 21 per cent of the region consists of forest areasand many indigenous peoples rely on them for timber and non-timber goods such as rattan, bamboo, resins, waxes, nuts, honey, spices and traditionalmedicines. Commercial timber extraction and replacement of natural forests with tree farms and plantations have caused widespread habitat losses. Ifcurrent trends persist, Indonesia’s lowland forests will be destroyed by 2005 on Sumatra and by 2010 on Kalimantan, with further heavy loss ofbiodiversity. A succession of major dam construction projects has also had adverse effects on biodiversity in Asia.

■ EuropeThe European landscape has been significantly altered by deforestation, drainage of wetlands, urban and industrial development, mining, road construction,pollution and changes to rivers and coastlines, as well as agricultural expansion and intensification. About 45 per cent of Europe is used for agriculture,placing wild habitats and species under direct pressure from agricultural activities, as well as limiting the space available to natural ecosystems. Largemammals such as the polar bear, wolf, lynx and bison now occupy only small relics of their original habitat and others, such as the taipan and the saiga,have become extinct. Around 260 vertebrate species are classified as critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable. Countries in Central and EasternEurope still possess a wealth of well-preserved landscapes, ecosystems and species that are rare or already extinct in Western Europe, however, economictransition in Eastern Europe has caused biodiversity funding to dry up. In Bulgaria, for example, domestic financing collapsed in the mid-1990s and up to90 per cent of all biodiveristy financing now comes from the EU and bilateral funds. Despite substantial contributions from countries such as theNetherlands, Germany and Switzerland, though, foreign aid rarely exceeds 10-15 per cent of required funding.

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTIONA rapid response to the long-term downwardtrend in species diversity, the CBD enteredinto force in December 1993, one and a halfyears after 164 heads of state signed theConvention at the UN Conference onEnvironment and Development Summit inJune 1992. By the end of 2001, the CBD hadbeen ratified by 182 governments. TheCartagena Protocol on Biosafety (see box onGMOs) was adopted in January 2000. TheGEF was appointed to operate as theConvention’s interim financial mechanism.The CBD has an important normative rolein reconciling many approaches toconserving species and ecosystems withinone sustainable development framework. Itsthree main goals are:

■ The conservation of biodiversity;

■ Sustainable use of the components ofbiodiversity; and

■ Sharing benefits arising from use ofgenetic resources in a fair andequitable way.

Earlier multilateral initiatives to safeguardthreatened species, their habitats, or both,resulted during the 1970s and 1980s in theConvention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora(CITES, see box above), the Convention onthe Conservation of Migratory Species of WildAnimal (CMS) and the Ramsar Conventionon Wetlands of International Importanceespecially as Waterfowl Habitat.

Various measures have been used to addressthe problem of habitat conversion and loss.The designation of protected areas, such asnational parks, is one of the most widelyused approaches for conserving habitats. Inaddition to national parks, a total of 167sites have now been designated as naturalheritage sites under the World HeritageConvention. The total area of protected siteshas increased continuously during the pastthree decades from less than 3 million km2

in 1970 to more than 12 million km2 by thelate 1990s (see figure), indicating

continuing efforts by governments toestablish protected areas.

In 1997, in response to concerns overinvasive species, UNEP, IUCN and researchpartners set up a Global Invasive SpeciesProgramme (GISP). It has been reviewingcurrent knowledge with a view to developingnew problem-solving tools. The GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility is anassessment tool that aims to improve theway information on biodiversity’s scientificaspects is collected and presented. TheMillennium Ecosystem Assessment, nowunder way, aims to provide a mechanismthat combines the assessment needs not onlyof the CBD and the Ramsar Convention butalso of the UN Convention to CombatDesertification. Regional responses to thebiodiversity challenge take variousinnovative forms, among them:

■ The planned Natura 2000 network willearmark more than 10 per cent of EUterritory for conservation, and an EmeraldNetwork for non-EU states will operatealong similar, though less binding lines;

■ The Andean Pact nations of Bolivia,Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuelahave enacted a law, effective since July1996, which seeks to regulate geneticresources prospecting and exploitation; and

■ Governments and NGOs in Canada,Mexico and the US have collaborated on aNorth American Waterfowl ManagementPlan to conserve migratory waterfowl.

BIODIVERSITY 13

BIODIVERSITYSafeguards over wildlife

CITES and the monitoring network known asTRAFFIC (Trade Records Analysis for Flora andFauna in International Commerce) continue totackle problems and issues that arise fromtrade in protected wild species and wildlifeproducts. The estimated value of global tradein wildlife products is US$10 000 million ayear. Its unlawful underside is organizedtrafficking in such products as rhino horn orelephant ivory from animals slaughteredillegally in the wild. The CITES secretariat,Interpol, the World Customs Union and severalwildlife NGOs, have been establishingnetworks and organizing training of customsofficials, border police, wildlife wardens andother relevant compliance authorities.

From the GEF portfolio: Managing Ghana’s coastal wetlands

Implemented by the World Bank, the CoastalWetlands Management Project in Ghana hasbeen set up to protect key coastal wetlandareas through active collaboration betweenpeople who rely on these ecosystems forlivelihood and other stakeholders. Local peoplehave worked with a national NGO, the GhanaWildlife Society, and the state WildlifeDepartment to plan and implementmanagement and conservation programmes.Wildlife Service staff received specializedtraining and significant gains in capacitybuilding, as well as major achievements inconservation and sustainable use of biodiversitywere realized. In addition to supporting work tomonitor biodiversity and identify sustainable

development options, this GEF-backed projecthas come up with management strategies forthe wetlands that safeguard critical bird habitatwithout alienating local resource users. Fivewetland ecosystems have been designated asRamsar sites, increases in migratory birdpopulations have been noted in three locationsand local communities have been empoweredto manage and use wetland resourcesresponsibly. Destruction of mangroves forfuelwood and habitat encroachment have beenreduced and all stakeholders have learned theimportance of cooperation in conservationefforts. This project is Ghana’s first majorattempt at community-based collaborativemanagement of natural areas.

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2.78

5.09

7.33

8.20

10.08

11.93

12.1811 496

sites

11 246sites

9 767sites

7 840sites

6 098sites

4 575sites

3 392sites

million km2

Global number and area of protectedsites by year

Note: areas of more than 1 000 ha, IUCN categories I–VI

Source: compiled form Greene and Paine 1997 and UNEP-WCMC 2001b

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are fat-soluble toxic chemicals that accumulateover many years in the environment and inhuman or animal tissues. A few of them, thepolychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxinsand furans, enter the air, land or water asindustrial exhausts or by-products. Most arethe residues of persistent organochlorinepesticides such as dieldrin,dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT ) orheptachlor, that have been banned in manycountries. Despite these restrictions, someare still in widespread production and use.

Research into the distance that airborneresidues travel and into their effects onhuman (especially infant) health has givenrise to renewed concern. In some parts of theworld, notably in polar regions, POPs mayenter the environment from far distantsources yet can build up to levels higherthan in their source regions (see box).Health risks to humans and other higheranimals include glandular and hormoneimbalances, immune system breakdowns,birth abnormalities, developmental defectsand neurological disorders.

A UNEP survey published in 1996 revealed thataldrin, DDT, dieldrin and toxaphene were stillbeing manufactured in a handful ofdeveloping countries. Some countries exportsuch products even while outlawing their useat home. Reports from the 60 countries thatparticipated in the survey also showed thatfarm chemicals containing nine different POPswere still being imported in over 20 cases.

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTIONSupporting implementation of theStockholm ConventionBoosting the scope of governments,especially in developing countries, toidentify, reduce and finally eliminate sourcesof POPs has long been acknowledged as acrucial step towards curbing toxic chemicallevels in the air, water and soil. TheStockholm Convention on PersistentOrganic Pollutants, adopted in May 2001and expected to enter into force in 2004, isthe positive outcome of decades ofinternational concern over POPs. InSeptember 2002, the convention had 151signatories and 21 parties.

The convention covers an initial list of 12chemicals or groups of chemicals. Eight arepesticides: aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin,endrin, heptachlor, mirex and toxaphene.Two of them, PCBs and hexachlorobenzene,are industrial chemicals, though the latter issometimes also used as a pesticide. Two aretoxic by-products of combustion andindustrial processes, the dioxins and furans.

Exemption is granted for continued use ofDDT until 2025 in ongoing programmes ofmalaria control in developing countries.Existing equipment such as electricaltransformers containing PCBs can alsocontinue in use until PCB-free replacementsare available. Phasing-out of themanufacture, import or use of POPs indeveloping and transition countries is to befunded on an interim basis by developed

countries through the GEF. New chemicalsmay be added to the target POPs list infuture, subject to a scientific review process.


PERS

ISTE

NT O

RGAN

IC P

OLLU

TANT

S

Tagish

Cape DorsetAlert

HeimaeyIsland

Svanvik

Ny-Ålesund

Dunai

‘clean’ air; low chlordaneand PCBs across theArctic Ocean

‘clean’ air; low toxapheneover NW Pacific

elevatedtoxaphenefrom US/Canadawest coast

elevatedPCBs and HCHEurope andwestern Russia

elevated PCBsand HCH fromRussia/Siberia

elevated PCBsand HCH fromRussia/Siberia

elevated chlordaneUS/Canada east coast

Long-range transport of pollutants to the Arctic

GEF and POPs

The Global Environment Facility is thedesignated interim principal entity to operatethe financial mechanism of the StockholmConvention. Concurrent with the adoption ofthe Convention, the GEF Council in May 2001,approved the “Initial guidelines for enablingactivities for the Stockholm Convention onPersistent Organic Pollutants”. The guidelinesprovide a framework for GEF support to theimplementation of the Stockholm Conventionthrough building national capacity to meet theobligations of the convention. At the same timethe council approved the UNEP-led project,“Development of National ImplementationPlans for the Management of PersistentOrganic Pollutants”, designed to act as a pilotin this endeavour.

In step with the negotiation of the StockholmConvention, the GEF Council has beenconsidering proposals for a GEF operationalprogramme related to persistent organicpollutants, and the designation of POPs as a focalarea. As a result the Council decided in May2002, to recommend that the GEF Assemblydesignates POPs as a new focal area in directsupport of the aims of the Stockholm Convention.Such designation would provide additionalopportunities, within the GEF, for programmingsupport for countries pursuing national plans tophase out, reduce, eliminate and dispose ofPOPs, and for specific phase out steps.

5

Pathways and sources for POP-contaminated aircoming from outside the Arctic

HCH = hexachlorocyclohexane

PCBs = polychlorinated biphenyls

Source: AMAP 1997

Some persistent toxic substances,including POPs and mercury, canbecome volatile in warm air and betransported by air masses. Afterdeposition, they can re-enter theatmosphere again and continue theirjourney, becoming long-distancecontaminants. The process cancontinue until they reach the coolerpolar areas where they condense onto particles or snow flakes in the air,which eventually land on the ground.

Due to the combination of harshclimate conditions with physico-chemical properties of persistent toxicsubstances, the polar regions, and theArctic in particular, create a sink forthese substances, which may result intheir levels being higher than in thesource regions. The implementation ofthe Stockholm Convention onPersistent Organic Pollutants may leadto a reduction in deposition of POPs inthe polar regions.

Assessment and informationUNEP, through its Chemicals Unit, iscurrently implementing with GEF financinga global assessment of the extent and natureof the threats posed by persistent toxicsubstances, including POPs (see box). UNEPalso organizes a POPs Information ClearingHouse providing open access to:

■ An inventory database collatingtoxicological and regulatory informationon POPs;

■ An alternatives database on safer chemicalsubstitutes and non-chemical options;

■ Survey data on POPs use, production,emission and control in over 70 countries;and

■ A list of remedial actions taken bygovernments and internationalorganizations.

Action to promote alternatives to theuse of POPsVarious UN agencies and internationalagricultural research institutes have urgedintegrated pest management (IPM) practicesthat reduce dependence on persistentchemicals by replacing them with safercontrol methods, including biologicalcontrol agents. UNEP and FAO, with GEFfinancing, are developing a programme topromote IPM in West Africa. A focus forprivate sector efforts is the Global CropProtection Federation, which promotes wiseuse of pesticides and the prevention ofpoisoning and misuse off the farm.

The GEF is financing actions to support thephase out of DDT as a means of malariavector control through a UNEP-led projectin Central America and Mexico, and asimilar initiative, involving collaborationbetween UNEP and WHO, is being developedin Africa. Through the World Bank, the GEFis developing a programme to deal withchemical stockpiles in Africa.

Under a UN Institute for Training andResearch/Inter-Organization Programme forthe Sound Management of Chemicals(UNITAR/IOMC) project to promote thepreparation and implementation of actionplans, major efforts have been made by theIOMC organizations to provide guidance to

countries in developing profiles or specificaspects of the necessary infrastructure forthe 1998 Rotterdam Convention on the PriorInformed Consent Procedure for CertainHazardous Chemicals and Pesticides inInternational Trade (known for short asPIC) and POPs reduction in pesticide use.These aspects include capacity building,disposal of obsolete pesticides, chemicaldisaster preparedness and establishment ofpoison control facilities. The PIC procedure,developed in the 1970s and 1980s, providesan important mechanism for formallyobtaining and disseminating the decisionsof importing countries on whether to receivefuture shipments of chemicals banned, orseverely restricted, by governments ofparticipating countries.

On the industry side, Crop Life International(CLI), formerly Global Crop ProtectionFederation and the GroupementInternationale des Federations desAssociations des Producteurs des Pesticides(GIFAP) are now playing more proactiveroles in promoting judicious use ofpesticides and reducing toxic exposures andmisuse.

Campaigning NGOs or private voluntaryorganizations active on POPs issues include:

■ Greenpeace, including its lobbying for thedevelopment of the POPs Convention;

■ The Pesticide Action Network (PAN)coalition, notable for its work with FAO onobsolete stockpiles of pesticides and itslobbying for the PIC Convention; and

■ The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF),with its global toxics initiative, which hasfocused on POPs, endocrine disruptingchemicals and pesticides.

In relation to the POPs Conventionnegotiations, many public sector NGOsorganized themselves into the InternationalPOPs Elimination Network (IPEN), whichhas brought together academic,community-based environmental,indigenous and public health groups. It isa unique attempt by public interest NGOsto self-organize around issues onchemicals. Also in relation to the POPsissues, the indigenous people in the Arctic,perceiving a threat to their way of life fromdistant sources of chemicals, haveorganized themselves into an effectivenegotiating force.

PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS 15

PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTSRegionally-based assessment of persistent toxic substances

Previously, few data have been available on theorigins, production, use, pathways anddeposition of persistent toxic substances inmost regions of the world. The Regionally-based Assessment (RBA) of Persistent ToxicSubstances (PTS), implemented by UNEP withclose to US$ 2.7 million in GEF funding,includes assessment of the 12 POPs targetedby the Stockholm Convention. The RBAcomplements the Global International WatersAssessment, and has the ultimate goal ofprioritizing issues and areas for future GEFinterventions. Its main aims are to:

■ Assess exposure and threat from PTS to theenvironment;

■ Demonstrate their transboundary nature andanalyse the major transport mechanisms;

■ Identify the major sources of the substancesconcerned; and

■ Analyse socio-economic implications of (andpossible solutions to) the problems.

The project will produce a report on each of theregions around the world which will then beused to produce a global overview identifyingpriorities and suggesting solutions. Findings arestill incomplete but key issues that haveemerged so far include:

■ Threats posed by large stockpiles ofunwanted chemicals in most countries;

■ Continued unintentional and unmonitoredemissions of PTS as by-products of industryand burning of waste; and

■ The extent to which POPs and other PTStravel through the environment, posing risksto people and wildlife far from their source.

■ GLOBAL PERSPECTIVELand degradation was estimated in 1991 tobe worsening at a rate of 5 to 6 million haevery year. By 1996, it had affected nearly2 000 million ha (15 per cent) of the world’sland area. Land degradation can havemultiple causes and impacts. Deforestationis the biggest single cause of landdegradation, followed by agriculturalactivities, overexploitation of vegetation andindustrial activities. Climate change canalso figure both as a cause and effect ofdegradation. If loss of soil organic matterresulting from degradation were curbed,more carbon could be stored in soils and inplant cover rather than released into theatmosphere, a potentially significant carbonsequestration gain.

Another key cause is loss of natural groundcover during conversion of marginaldrylands, wilderness areas or forests toagricultural uses. Even in productiveagricultural zones, inappropriate landmanagement policy and practice(sometimes prompted by overcrowding, fooddeficits and national debt) can give rise towaterlogging, salinization, soil erosion, lossof soil fertility and, in the worst cases,outright desertification. Irrigated drylandsand mountain soils are especiallyvulnerable. Over-reliance on agrochemicalsis a less self-evident factor behind landdegradation. Others are acidification, toxicchemical residues and disasters such asfloods or droughts. Inequitable land tenurecan play a part in raising the likelihood of

degradation. So, too, can the spread ofurban settlements, transport networks,industrial developments and other humaninfrastructure.

The main types of soil degradation are watererosion, wind erosion, chemicaldegradation, and physical degradation.These impacts can considerably lower theproductive capacity of land. They alsoreduce the soil’s ability to filter outpollutants and act as a buffer for soil acidityor alkalinity. Soil degradation also limits thecontribution soils can make to critical life

support cycles such as the hydrological ornitrogen cycle and to maintaining naturalhabitats and biodiversity. In the worst cases,land degradation leads to outrightdesertification, defined by the UNConvention to Combat Desertification as‘land degradation in arid, semi-arid and drysub-humid areas’ and estimated to affectbetween one-third and half the world’ssurface area. Despite improvements in soilconservation techniques and generalrecognition of the urgent need to slow therate of land degradation, there are no clearsigns of progress.


LAND

DEG

RADA

TION Degradation extent Cause

580 million ha Deforestation — vast reserves of forests have been degraded bylarge-scale logging and clearance for farm and urban use. More than220 million ha of tropical forests were destroyed during 1975–90,mainly for food production.

680 million ha Overgrazing — about 20 per cent of the world's pasture andrangelands have been damaged. Recent losses have been most severein Africa and Asia.

137 million ha Fuelwood consumption — about 1 730 million m3 of fuelwood areharvested annually from forests and plantations. Woodfuel is theprimary source of energy in many developing regions.

550 million ha Agricultural mismanagement — water erosion causes soil lossesestimated at 25 000 million tonnes annually. Soil salinization andwaterlogging affect about 40 million ha of land globally.

19.5 million ha Industry and urbanization — urban growth, road construction,mining and industry are major factors in land degradation in differentregions. Valuable agricultural land is often lost.

Source: FAO 1996

Extent and causes of land degradation

NoneLightModerateStrongExtreme





86%

South America

1%

6%6%

North America

1%5%1%

93%

Europe

1%15%6%

0.3%

77%

Asia

82%

<0.1%

5%

7% 3%

Africa

6%

6%

0.2%

4%

83%

Extent and severity of land degradation

Source: UNEP 1992

LAND DEGRADATION 17

LAND DEGRADATIONLand degradation – regional highlights

■ AfricaDesertification is an ever-present risk in almost 50 per cent of Africa’s drylands. Some 60 per cent of African households rely on agriculture for a livelihood.By 1999, 32 per cent (202 million ha) of potentially cultivable land was cultivated and 906 million ha of grasslands were permanently grazed. There havebeen substantial cereal production gains in recent decades but these came about mainly through expansion of the agricultural boundary into marginallands, natural forests and wetlands. Such conversion carries an almost inevitable risk of land degradation. In many areas, loss of natural vegetation coverhas exposed soils to wind and water erosion. Sediment can fill dams and rivers with silt, cutting output from hydropower plants and increasing the risk offlood disasters in settled estuary and river margins. In addition, nutrient depletion sharply reduces agricultural yields, a shortfall that Africa’s many low-income or subsistence farmers cannot afford to remedy by using fertilizers. Millions of people in at least 16 countries have faced food shortages in recentyears, through crop failures or distribution breakdowns linked to civil unrest or conflict. Land tenure is a hot political issue in many parts of sub-SaharanAfrica. More equitable access to permanent farmland could do much to forestall land conversion.

■ Latin America and the CaribbeanWater and wind erosion are widespread agents of land degradation, affecting over 14 per cent of territory in South America and 26 per cent in CentralAmerica. Rapid urban growth and land conversion are key underlying causes. Between 1972 and 1999, the boundary of permanent arable land advancedby over 35 per cent of its former extent in South America, by over 21 per cent in Meso-America and in the Caribbean by 32 per cent, while region-wide thearea under irrigation grew by some 2 per cent a year. Forest has been cleared in Argentina, Brazil and elsewhere on a vast scale for cattle ranching orfarming of cash crops for export. Tax incentives and subsidies have boosted this trend in many countries. Expansion of infrastructure such as roads andsettlements has led to further clearance of natural areas. A threefold rise in use of chemical fertilizers in 1972-97 led to widespread nitrification of soilsand water, a hazard to human health. Salinization of irrigated soil affects much of the region and in places has led to desertification, most notably inArgentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Peru. Behind many of these problems lie inequitable patterns of land tenure and ineffective land reform programmes.

■ West AsiaDesertification and land degradation are common across this region of extensive arid and semi-arid lands. In Iraq, Jordan, Syria and over the whole ArabianPeninsula the desertification of rangelands is a pressing problem. Conflict and unrest in and around West Asia have led governments to adopt policiesaimed at national self-sufficiency and consequently develop sizeable agricultural sectors. As a result, irrigated land area more than doubled between 1972and 1999 from nearly 3 to over 7 million ha. In many cases, these policies have had damaging impacts on land and water resources. Wind erosion is a keyagent of land degradation and overgrazing is among the factors that have hastened its effects on rangelands. Grazing intensity has more than doubled inrecent decades and in places livestock concentrations exceed the land’s carrying capacity by a factor of four or more. Recent policy moves have led to theintroduction of range reserves in some parts of the region.

■ Asia and the PacificDegradation affects over 104 million ha of land around the region. Land use changes driven by rapidly expanding populations are part of the problem.Needy people without access to prime land and resources are driven to exploit marginal lands or forest areas, especially around timber extraction sites.Water erosion is at its most severe in the Himalayas, Central Asia, China, the South Pacific islands and Australia. Wind erosion seriously affects manycountries, including Afghanistan, China, India, Iran and Pakistan. In India, as much as 27 per cent of soil had suffered erosion by 1997, critically reducingagricultural potential. Over half of Asia’s 1 977 million ha of drylands are also affected by desertification. Soil erosion, compaction and salinization are keysymptoms; others are weed infestations and loss of soil fertility. A critical underlying cause is extraction of groundwater and surface water for irrigation tolevels that exceed the land’s drainage capacity or the tolerance of crops to sub-surface salts (salinization). A more recently emerging but very widespreadproblem is contamination of soils and pastures by urban, industrial or agricultural chemicals and wastes, especially heavy metals.

■ EuropeLand use in Europe is determined to a large extent by the competing demands of farming, forestry, environmental care or amenity uses and mountingpressure to develop urban, industrial and transport infrastructure. Erosion, mainly water-induced, remains a problem in the black soil regions of theRepublic of Moldova, the Russian Federation and the Ukraine. In the Commonwealth of Independent States, 475 million ha (79 per cent) of cultivated landis affected by erosion in 12 countries. The collapse of centrally planned economies in the late 1990s in much of Central and Eastern Europe put an end tostate subsidies for large collective farms and the highly intensive agricultural techniques associated with them. The environmental outcomes have beenlargely beneficial, including substantial reforestation. Soil contamination by industrial chemicals, inadequate waste disposal and mining, and militaryactivities nevertheless persists in many areas. So, too, do soil salinization and waterlogging, mainly the relics of giant irrigation and hydro-power schemes.Soil acidification from acid rain has decreased throughout Europe by 50 per cent since the 1980s, mainly owing to reductions in sulphur emissions. Whereit persists, however, it continues to cause grave concern.

■ INTERNATIONAL ACTION The UN Convention to CombatDesertification (UNCCD) came into effect in1996. It commits its parties (of which therewere 177 by December 2001) to developpractical national programmes involvinglocal stakeholders and non-governmentalorganizations. It also has detailed regionalannexes for dealing with specific problemsin areas such as the Sahel and the NorthernMediterranean. A 20-year global effort tocurb desertification could cost US$10-22billion a year yet UNCCD’s funding is afraction of this sum. Most industrializedcountries do not see desertification as aproblem that has global relevance.

Among other multilateral environmentalagreements that relate to land degradation orcontamination issues are the StockholmConvention on Persistent Organic Pollutants(see POPs section), the Convention on

Biological Diversity and the RamsarConvention on Wetlands. The latter twoinclude provisions for curbing loss of naturalvegetation. The World Water Forum held inMarch 2000 led to the informal adoption of‘water visions’ for all the regions of the world,many of which take account of land issues.

International scientific bodies that monitorland degradation include theIntergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange, which among other things, tracksthe effects of global warming on agricultureand vice versa. A significant new initiative isthe Millennium Ecosystem Assessment,launched in 2001. It is a bid to understandthe goods and services provided by keyecosystems such as farmlands or forests andthe processes that underlie and link them.

Several regional groupings pursue agendasthat urge safeguards over land or land use.

The Maghreb Arab Union and the SouthernAfrican Development Community, as well asthe Economic Community of West AfricanStates and the Permanent InterstateCommittee for Drought Control in the Sahelhave all submitted sub-regional plans forincorporation into UNCCD. Several countriesin West Asia are on a similar track. In Asiaand the Pacific, regional initiatives areproving elusive but some larger countrieshave developed far-reaching nationalinitiatives or frameworks for tackling urgentland issues. India, for instance, hasmounted at least six such initiatives since1990. In Latin America, members of theAmazonian Pact, Sustainable DevelopmentCommission, Central American IntegrationSystem and the Andean Pact have all agreedto fight land degradation or to set upmonitoring and control networks to trackand prevent it.


LAND

DEG

RADA

TION

Forest loss

FAO calculated in 2000 that almost one-third ofthe world’s land area is forested, all but 5 percent of it by naturally occurring rather thanplanted trees. Forest cover is steady or evenincreasing in places but is shrinking in mostdeveloping countries. From a total world cover ofalmost 4 000 million ha in 1990, the world’sforest area had receded by nearly 94 million haby the year 2000, an average rate of just undera quarter of 1 per cent a year. Tropical forestsstill bear the heaviest losses, at rates that runclose to 1 per cent a year. Of the 16.1 million haof natural forests annually lost to deforestationor replaced by plantations in the 1990s, 15.2million ha were in the tropics. Nearly 70 per centof losses arose from land conversion toagricultural uses, the rest mainly fromovergrazing, logging and fuelwood gathering.

Following concerns expressed at the 1972Stockholm Conference, international initiativesfor conservation and sustainable managementof tropical forests have been in the making forthree decades. In the 1980s, the InternationalTropical Timber Organization (ITTO) and theTropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP,reconstituted in 1995 as the National ForestryAction Program) were set up, linking theconcerns of commerce, governments andNGOs. In addition to the principles ofsustainable forest management outlined inAgenda 21 and in the Forest Principles adoptedat the 1992 UNCED Summit, the threeinternational conventions developed as part ofthe UNCED process (UNFCCC, CBD and UNCCD)

have significant indirect bearing on the future ofthe world’s forests and forest lands. During thelate 1990s, under the auspices of the UNCommission on Sustainable Development, theIntergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) andthe Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF),set in motion a process intended to lead to ‘acommon vision’ for managing, conserving andsustainably developing forests of all kinds.Nearly 300 proposals for action have arisenfrom the IPF/IFF process and the United NationsForum on Forests (UNFF) was set up in October2000 to pursue them.

A Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) wasalso established by 11 international

organizations within and outside the UN systemwith agendas relating to forests, to help putUNFF proposals for action into practice andspeed adoption of policy measures bystakeholder governments. The main operativemeans of the UNFF is a programme of workextending over several years and a plan ofaction. An inaugural session of the UNFF in June2001 failed to create an agreed mandate or anaccountable procedure for implementing IPF/IFFproposals for action. Despite the proliferation oforganizations, ways and means, currentassessments reveal no significant progresstowards arresting deforestation and thedegradation processes associated with it.

100

20

0

30

40

50

Africa AsiaLatin America

60

expansion of shifting cultivationinto undisturbed forests

intensification of agriculturein shifting cultivation areas

conversion of forestto permanentsmall-scale agriculture

conversion of forestto permanentlarge-scale agriculture

other

gains in forest areaand canopy cover

10

70

80

90

In the 1990s, almost 70 percent of deforested areaswere changed to agriculturalland. In Latin America, mostconversion was large-scale,whereas in Africa small-scale agricultural enterprisespredominated

Source: FAO 2001b

Causes of forest area change (percentage of total) by region

Elements of each of the four possible futureshighlighted above can be observed in today’sworld, as can the trends and drivers thatcould push the world in the direction of oneor another of them. Which scenario — orwhich combination of scenarios — prevailsin reality is a matter partly of contingencyand partly of choice.

GEO-3 emphasizes that the next 30 yearswill be as crucial as the past 30 for shapingthe future of the environment. Old troubleswill persist and fresh challenges will emergeas increasingly heavy demands are placedupon resources that, in many cases, arealready in a fragile state. The increasingpace of change and degree of interaction

between regions and issues has made itmore difficult than ever to look into thefuture with confidence. GEO-3 uses fourscenarios to explore what the future couldbe, depending on different policyapproaches. It is now generally acceptedthat scenarios do not predict. Rather, theypaint pictures of possible futures and explore

the differing outcomes that might result ifbasic assumptions are changed. The GEO-3scenarios, which span developments inmany overlapping areas includingpopulation, economics, technology andgovernance, are described in the boxes thatfollow. They are:

OUTLOOK 19

OUTLOOK 2002–2032

Markets First

Most of the world adopts the values and expectations prevailing in today’s industrialized countries. The wealth of nations and the optimal play of marketforces dominate social and political agendas. Trust is placed in further globalization and liberalization to enhance corporate wealth, create new enterprisesand livelihoods, and so help people and communities to afford to insure against — or pay to fix — social and environmental problems. Ethical investors,together with citizen and consumer groups, try to exercise growing corrective influence but are undermined by economic imperatives. The powers of stateofficials, planners and lawmakers to regulate society, economy and the environment continue to be overwhelmed by expanding demands.

Policy First

Decisive initiatives are taken by governments in an attempt to reach specific social and environmental goals. A coordinated pro-environment and anti-poverty drive balances the momentum for economic development. Environmental and social costs and gains are factored into policy measures, regulatoryframeworks and planning processes. All these are reinforced by fiscal levers or incentives such as carbon taxes and tax breaks. International ‘soft law’treaties and binding instruments affecting environment and development are integrated into unified blueprints and their status in law is upgraded, thoughfresh provision is made for open consultation processes to allow for regional and local variants.

Security First

This scenario assumes a world of striking disparities where inequality and conflict prevail. Socio-economic and environmental stresses give rise to waves ofprotest and counteraction. Discord becomes increasingly prevalent, the more powerful and wealthy groups focus on self-protection, creating enclaves akinto the present day ‘gated communities’. Such islands of advantage provide a degree of enhanced security and economic benefits for dependentcommunities in their immediate surroundings but they exclude the disadvantaged mass of outsiders. Welfare and regulatory services fall into disuse butmarket forces continue to operate outside the walls.

Sustainability First

A new environment and development paradigm emerges in response to the challenge of sustainability, supported by new, more equitable values andinstitutions. A more visionary state of affairs prevails, where radical shifts in the way people interact with one another and with the world around themstimulate and support sustainable policy measures and accountable corporate behaviour. There is much fuller collaboration between governments, citizensand other stakeholder groups in decision-making on issues of close common concern. A consensus is reached on what needs to be done to satisfy basicneeds and realize personal goals without beggaring others or spoiling the outlook for posterity.

1970

6

8

10

18

0

2

4

12

2000

2030

14

16

Carbon dioxide emissions from all sources (billion tonnes carbon/year)

Carbon dioxide is emittedabove all from the use offossil fuels. For all fourscenarios, it is assumed thatstabilization of primaryenergy use is first reachedat the end of the 21stcentury.

Source: IMAGE 2.2 (seeGEO-3 technical annex)

■ ENVIRONMENTALIMPLICATIONS

Some of the environmental implicationsarising out of the four scenarios explored forGEO-3 fall within the GEF focal areas.

Climate change ■ In the Markets First and Security First

scenarios, the absence of effective policiesto reduce emissions of CO2 and othergreenhouse gases, as well as slow transferof technology, lead to significant increasesin emissions over the next 30 years.

■ Policy actions taken under a Policy Firstscenario, such as carbon taxes andinvestments in non-fossil-fuel energysources, effectively curb growth in globalemissions and lead to actual reductions,beginning around 2030.

■ The Sustainability First scenario impliesdramatic behavioural shifts, along withimproved production and conversionefficiencies, resulting in a very rapidlevelling off of emissions followed by adecline by the middle of the 2020s.

Time lags in the climate system mean thatchanges in emissions patterns will have adelayed effect on the atmosphericconcentrations of CO2 and even more so onthe actual changes in climate. Strong linksbetween climate change and otherenvironmental issues, specifically local andregional air pollution, will further affect therates of temperature change. In the longterm, the dynamics of a world resemblingMarkets First or Security First imply muchfaster and greater overall temperature rises.

Delays in the response of the climate systemare also apparent in other ways. For instance,there is very little difference, by 2032,between the scenarios in terms of sea levelrise. The total increase since the beginning ofthe century is approximately 10 cm, yet thislevel and rate of rise has serious implicationsfor coastal and low-lying regions throughoutthe world, implying that adaptationmeasures are important to consider alongwith attempts to reduce emissions.

International watersLooking ahead to the coming decades,global climate change may have a strongimpact on the local availability offreshwater. Growing populations andincreased economic activity, particularly inagriculture, will lead to increased demand

for freshwater in most scenarios. The tworegions most affected by severe water stressare Asia and the Pacific, and West Asia, anda closer examination of these two regionsdemonstrates some of the key challengesassociated with this issue.

Water stress may also become a key issue inCentral and Eastern Europe over the next30 years, particularly under the MarketsFirst and Security First scenarios, witheconomic development and populationincreases leading to sharp increases inoverall water demand.

In 2002, close to 1 700 million people (morethan 50 per cent of the population) in Asiaand the Pacific, and 74 million people(almost 90 per cent of the population) inWest Asia live under severe water stress.Moving towards 2032, in Asia and the Pacific:

■ Growth in demand for water is especiallyhigh under the Markets First scenario,and water withdrawals increase in allsectors, particularly to meet increasingirrigation needs. These increases lead toan expansion of areas with severe waterstress, and more people are affectedthroughout the region.

■ In Security First, growth in demand istempered by slower economic growth andno further expansion in irrigated areas,rather than any significant efforts tobecome more efficient. However, highpopulation growth under this scenariomore than offsets these trends.

■ As the effective policies of a Policy Firstworld and the lifestyle changes associatedwith a Sustainability First scenariocombine with greater regionalcooperation and technology transfer, waterwithdrawals remain at current levels oreven decrease in most of the region.Robust economic growth under each ofthese scenarios is tempered by policiessuch as water pricing, and more efficientuse of water in agriculture due toadvances in biotechnology. However,because population growth offsets thesetrends, the total number of people living inareas under severe water stress continues toincrease across Asia, even in the PolicyFirst and Sustainability First scenarios.

West Asia is one of the most water-stressedregions of the world, a problem thatcontinues to increase as water demand


OUTL

OOK

2002

–203

2


total global 2 414

Africa 172

Asia and the Pacific1 693

Europe 239

Latin Americaand the Caribbean 112

North America 124

West Asia 74

Security First

Policy First

Markets First

2002

Number of people living in areas withsevere water stress (million persons)

All the pie charts show total global impacts. The top pieshows the current situation, the relative size of the othersreflects the magnitude of impacts by 2032 under the fourscenarios.

Source: WaterGAP 2.1

exceeds available resources, owing topopulation growth and expansion ofdifferent development sectors.

■ Under a Markets First scenario,deteriorating water quality and increasingcompetition between sectors (mainlybetween the domestic and agriculturalsectors) hamper food production and leadto conflicts, increasing water-relatedhealth problems and areas with severewater stress. Over 200 million people areaffected by 2032.

■ The same holds true for a Security Firstscenario, with water withdrawals beingslightly higher than in the Markets Firstscenario due to more water-cooledthermal electricity production.

■ Under the Policy First scenario,reductions in irrigated areas, combinedwith structural changes in the way wateris used in industry, lead to reductions intotal water withdrawals. The area underwater stress is stabilized by adoptingstrategic water resources management toincrease water use efficiency and resourcedepletion.

■ Reductions in irrigated areas and moreefficient water use by industry also occur inSustainability First, leading to reductionsin total water withdrawals. Furthermore,the increase of freshwater made availableby desalination technology and lowereddemands, achieved through the wideapplication of biotechnology in foodproduction and a decrease in populationgrowth rate in the region, help tocounteract the effects of additional demandrelated to higher economic growth.Although total withdrawals drop in theselast two scenarios, water scarcity persistsand demand continues to exceed availablewater resources.

The impact of water stress in the differentscenarios also depends on relationsbetween individual countries in West Asiaand on the region’s relations with otherregions, as about 60 per cent of surfacewater resources originate from outside WestAsia. In Security First, conflicts andtension increase within the region, as wellas with countries outside the region,eventually leading to water wars. Theseconcerns ease in Policy First andSustainability First as countries negotiateagreements on the equitable sharing ofsurface water resources.

Biodiversity Biodiversity conservation represents anothermajor environmental challenge at theglobal level, and will continue under threatif there is no strenuous policy action to curbhuman activity. Built-up areas increase innearly all regions and scenarios, with theintroduction of new infrastructure possiblyleading to uncontrolled resourceexploitation.

■ In both Markets First and Security First,these resource-driven processes accelerate,with further disruption of remainingwilderness areas and severe impacts onbiodiversity and indigenous peoples.

■ A Policy First world brings additionalareas under protection and introducesmitigation measures. However, as in the

previous century, these are carried out atrates far below that of development.

■ Even under Sustainability First conditions,increasing impacts from infrastructure aswell as continued growth in consumptionof fuels, minerals and goods and servicesfrom natural resources, cannot becompletely avoided.

Together with further land conversion andthe growing impacts of climate change,these developments severely depletebiodiversity in most regions in all scenarios,with particular pressure being placed oncoastal ecosystems. Much attention will haveto be focused on this challenge in thecoming decades in order to begin to altercurrent trends.

OUTLOOK 21

OUTLOOK 2002–2032Ecosystems impacted by infrastructure expansion

high impact

medium – highimpact

low – mediumimpact

semi-deserts anddesertswetlands

forests

grassland/savannah

croplands

water

-

2002

2032: Markets First

Source: GLOBIO

2032: Sustainability First

Land degradation Increases in infrastructure as well asunsustainable agricultural practices willresult in increased land degradation inmany parts of the world. Several of the keyissues are demonstrated by a closer look atAfrica and Latin America and the Caribbean.

In Africa, there is an increasing risk of landdegradation, loss of forests, and increasedexploitation of remaining forests.

■ Stronger economic growth in the regionunder Policy First and Sustainability Firstconditions, implies that the risk of landdegradation is higher than in Markets First.However, the translation from risk to actualdegradation may be mediated in a numberof ways. For example, easier access to supportservices under these two scenarios helpsfarmers to manage soils better and policiesbased on integrated land managementbecome commonplace in the region.

■ At the other end of the spectrum, in aSecurity First scenario, a combination ofinequitable land distribution, poor farmingmethods, unfavourable land tenure systemsand inefficient irrigation systems leads todeclining productivity of grazing andagricultural lands.

■ Similar problems arise in Markets Firstas better quality agricultural land is takenover for commodity and cash cropproduction.

Land and forest degradation as well as forestfragmentation remain among the mostrelevant environmental issues in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean in all scenarios.

■ Significant loss of forest area and highlevels of exploitation of existing forestsoccur in a Markets First scenario.

■ In a Security First world, the control overforest resources by transnationalcompanies that create cartels in associationwith the national groups in powerpromotes the expansion of some forestareas, but this is not enough to stop overalldeforestation. As well, under both of thesescenarios, the agricultural frontiercontinues to expand into rainforestecosystems, posing significant risks for landdegradation.

■ More effective management remedies someof these problems in Policy First, aspolicies to promote forest plantations areenacted and institutional strengtheningcreates better forest control.

■ Land degradation resulting fromdeforestation stops almost completely inSustainability First. As in the Policy Firstscenario, enforcement of direct and indirectregulations leads to improvements incontrolling soil erosion, dramaticallyreducing the amount of cropland lost todegradation.

■ LESSONS FROM THE FUTUREThe environmental implications of thevarious scenarios illustrate the legacy of pastdecades and the level of effort that will beneeded to reverse powerful trends. Thedifferent outcomes under the GEO-3scenarios clearly demonstrate the crucialrole and importance of policy decisions inshaping tomorrow’s world. Some of themajor lessons include the following:

■ There can be significant delays betweenchanges in human behaviour and theirenvironmental impacts. This means: – much of the environmental change

that will occur over the next 30 yearshas already been set in motion by pastand current actions; and

– many of the effects of environmentallyrelevant policies put into place over thenext 30 years will not be apparent untillong afterwards.

■ Achieving widely agreed environmentaland social goals will require dramatic andcoordinated action starting now andcontinuing for a number of years. Stepsmust include policies based on preventionand adaptation.

■ Important linkages exist between differentenvironmental issues and betweenenvironmental and broader social issues.It follows that:– policy can be made more effective by

looking for synergies or ‘co-benefits’;and

– care must be taken to avoid conflictsbetween policies.

■ The establishment of strong institutionsfor environmental governance is aprerequisite for almost all other policies.

■ Not all policy instruments are appropriatefor all situations.

■ The achievement of environmental goalswill require decisive action, will encounterunforeseen eventualities and will nothappen overnight. For better or worse, thefate of this endeavour is in our hands.


OUTL

OOK

2002

–203

2 Land area impacted by infrastructure

2002

2002

2002

2002

2002

Africa

40

50

60

100

0

20

30

10

Asia andthe Pacific

Europe Latin Americaand the Caribbean

NorthAmerica

globalWest Asia Polar

70

80

90

Markets First


Security First

Policy First

2002

2002

2002

Source: GLOBIO

■ WORLD SUMMIT ONSUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTOUTCOMES

Three months after the launch of GEO-3 inMay 2002, the international communitygathered in the South African city ofJohannesburg between 26 August and4 September at a world summit, whichbrought together world leaders to rechargeinternational efforts to achieve sustainabledevelopment.

The two-week World Summit on SustainableDevelopment (WSSD), culminated in anumber of documents. Among them is thePlan of Implementation, which commits theinternational community to strengthen thesustainable development agenda. The planoutlines a number of important areas forthe Global Environment Facility. Thefollowing are some of the more specificdecisions that relate to the GEF:

■ Under the section related to changingunsustainable patterns of consumptionand production, the plan calls for theutilization of financial instruments andmechanisms, particularly the GEF, to

provide financial resources to developingcountries, especially the least developedcountries and small island developingstates. There would be several intendedpurposes for this funding support, the firstof which would be to enable suchcountries to meet their capacity needs fortraining and technical know-how. It ishoped that funding support would alsowork to strengthen national institutions inreliable, affordable, economically viable,socially acceptable and environmentallysound energy. Included in this would bethe promotion of energy efficiency andconservation, renewable energy andadvanced energy technologies, such ascleaner fossil fuel technologies.

■ Under the section on protecting andmanaging the natural resource base ofeconomic and social development, thePlan of Implentation calls on the SecondGEF Assembly to take action on therecommendations of the GEF Council.These recommendations concern thedesignation of land degradation(desertification and deforestation) as afocal area of the GEF in order to support

the successful implementation of the UNConvention to Combat Desertification. Theassembly should also consider making theGEF a financial mechanism of the CCD.In this way, it would be possible to takethe decisions of the CCD Conference of theParties into account, while recognizingthe complementary roles of the GEF andthe Global Mechanism of the conventionin providing and mobilizing resources forthe elaboration and implementation ofaction programmes.

■ The section on sustainable development ofsmall island developing states calls for theacceleration of national and regionalimplementation of the Programme ofAction, with adequate financial resources.Included in this is the transfer ofenvironmentally sound technologies,through the GEF focal areas, andassistance for capacity-building from theinternational community. It also calls forthe support of freshwater programmes forsmall island developing states, includingthrough the GEF focal areas.

AFTERWORD:WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES 23

AFTERWORD

Sustainable development challenges and commitment

In a political declaration adopted at the end ofthe summit - The Johannesburg Declaration onSustainable Development - world leadershighlighted challenges facing humanity today.The following are the challenges of significanceto GEF activities:

■ We recognize that poverty eradication,changing consumption and productionpatterns, and protecting and managing thenatural resource base for economic andsocial development are overarching objectivesof, and essential requirements for, sustainabledevelopment.

■ The deep fault line that divides human societybetween the rich and the poor and the ever-increasing gap between the developed anddeveloping worlds pose a major threat toglobal prosperity, security and stability.

■ The global environment continues to suffer.Loss of biodiversity continues, fish stocks

continue to be depleted, desertification claimsmore and more fertile land, the adverse effectsof climate change are already evident, naturaldisasters are more frequent and moredevastating and developing countries morevulnerable, and air, water and marine pollutioncontinue to rob millions of a decent life.

Committing themselves to sustainabledevelopment, the world leaders declared,among other things, that:

■ We welcome the Johannesburg Summit focuson the indivisibility of human dignity and areresolved through decisions on targets,timetables and partnerships to speedilyincrease access to basic requirements suchas clean water, sanitation, adequate shelter,energy, health care, food security and theprotection of biodiversity.

■ We are committed to ensure that women’sempowerment and emancipation, and genderequality are integrated in all activitiesencompassed within Agenda 21, theMillennium Development Goals and theJohannesburg Plan of Implementation.

■ We recognize the reality that global societyhas the means and is endowed with theresources to address the challenges ofpoverty eradication and sustainabledevelopment confronting all humanity.Together we will take extra steps to ensurethat these available resources are used to thebenefit of humanity.

■ We undertake to strengthen and improvegovernance at all levels, for the effectiveimplementation of Agenda 21, the MillenniumDevelopment Goals and the JohannesburgPlan of Implementation.


GEO-

3 CO

LLAB

ORAT

ING

CENT

RES

ACSAD AGUADIE AIT BCAS CEDARE CEU

UNIVERSITYOF CHILE

UNIVERSITYOF

COSTA RICA

EARTHCOUNCIL

EEA IBAMAGRID-CHRISTCHURCH

IGCIICIS IISD

ISLANDRESOURCESFOUNDATION

IOC

MSU NEMA

SEPA

NESDA NIES REC

RIVM

RING

SARDC SCOPE SEI SPREPSIC TEI

TERI UWICED

IUCN

CEC ofNAAEC

WRI

Global Environment Outlook reports can be ordered from

Earthscan Publications Ltd

120 Pentonville Road

London N1 9JN, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0) 207 278 0433

Fax: +44 (0) 207 278 1142

http://www.earthscan.co.uk

SMI (Distribution Services) Ltd

PO Box 119, Stevenage

Hertfordshire SG1 4TP, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)1438 748111

Fax: +44 (0)1438 748844

E-mail: [email protected]

Paperback US$37.50

Hardback US$85.00

How to access GEO on Internet:

Japan: http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/geo/

Kenya: http://www.unep.org/geo/

Mexico: http://www.rolac.unep.mx/geo/

Norway: http://www.grida.no/geo/

Switzerland: http://www.grid.unep.ch/geo/

United States: http://grid2.cr.usgs.gov/geo/

United Kingdom: http://www.unep-wcmc.org/geo/

How to access GEF on the Internet:

http://www.gefweb.org/

http://www.unep.org/gef/

http://www.undp.org/gef/

http://www.worldbank.org/gef

Further information

UNEP

www.unep.orgUnited Nations Environment Programme

PO Box 30552, Nairobi, KenyaTel: +254 2 623562

Fax: +254 2 623943/44E-mail: [email protected]

Web site: http://www.unep.org

00 Change Challenge final - · PDF filein collaboration with the Division of GEF Coordination...

Documents

Transcript of 00 Change Challenge final - · PDF filein collaboration with the Division of GEF Coordination...