By Patrick ten Brink, Augustin Berghöfer, Christoph
Schröter-Schlaack, Pavan Sukhdev, Alexandra Vakrou,
Stephen White, and Heidi Wittmer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Part I: The global biodiversity crisis: challenges
and opportunities for policy makers
Natural capital—our ecosystems, biodiversity, and
natural resources—underpins economies, societies
and individual wellbeing. The values of its myriad
benefits are, however, often overlooked or poorly
understood. They are rarely taken fully into account
through economic signals in markets, or in day to day
decisions by business and citizens, nor indeed
reflected adequately in the accounts of society.
The steady loss of forests, soils, wetlands and coral
reefs is closely tied to this economic invisibility. so too
are the losses of species and of productive assets like
fisheries, driven partly by ignoring values beyond the
immediate and private. We are running down our
natural capital stock without understanding the value
of what we are losing. Missed opportunities to invest
in this natural capital contribute to the biodiversity crisis
that is becoming more evident and more pressing by
the day. The degradation of soils, air, water and biological
resources can negatively impact on public
health, food security, consumer choice and business
opportunities. The rural poor, most dependent on the
natural resource base, are often hardest hit.
Under such circumstances, strong public policies are
of the utmost importance. These policy solutions need
tailoring to be socially equitable, ecologically effective,
and economically efficient.
solutions are already emerging from cooperation between
economists and scientists—and being tested
and refined around the world. They point to four urgent
strategic priorities:
- to halt deforestation and forest degradation (i)
as an integral part of climate change mitigation and
adaptation focused on "green carbon" and (ii) to
preserve the huge range of services and goods
forests provide to local people and the wider
community;
- to protect tropical coral reefs—and the associated
livelihoods of half a billion people—through
major efforts to avoid global temperature rise and
ocean acidification;
- to save and restore global fisheries and related
jobs, currently an underperforming asset in danger
of collapse and generating $50 billion less per
year than it could;
- to recognize the deep link between ecosystem
degradation and the persistence of
rural poverty and align policies across sectors
with key Millennium development goals.
Two related challenges lie ahead. The first is to understand
the values of natural capital and integrate them
into decision-making. The second is to respond—efficiently and equitably.
Part II: Measuring what we manage: information
tools for decision-makers
Unlike economic and human capital, natural capital has
no dedicated systems of measurement, monitoring and
reporting. This is astonishing given its importance for
jobs and mainstream economic sectors as well as its
contribution to future economic development. For
instance, we have only scratched the surface of what
natural processes and genetic resources have to offer.
As part of good governance, decision-making affecting
people and using public funds needs to be objective,
balanced and transparent. Access to the right information
at the right time is fundamental to coherent policy
trade-offs. Better understanding and quantitative
measurement of biodiversity and ecosystem values to
support integrated policy assessments are a core part
of the long-term solution.
The first key need is to improve and systematically use
science-based indicators to measure impacts and
progress and alert us to possible "tipping points" (sudden
ecosystem collapse). Specific ecosystem service
indicators are needed alongside existing biodiversity
tools. Another key need is to extend national income
accounts and other accounting systems to take the
value of nature into account and monitor how natural
assets depreciate or grow in value with appropriate
investments. New approaches to macroeconomic
measurement must cover the value of ecosystem
services, especially to those who depend on them
most—"the GDP of the Poor."
Part III: Available solutions: instruments for
better stewardship of natural capital
TEEB's analysis highlights existing and emerging
solutions suitable for wider replication.
Rewarding benefits through payments and
markets: Payments for ecosystem services (PES
schemes) can be local (e.g. water provisioning) up to
global (e.g. REDD-Plus proposals for Reduced Emissions
from Deforestation and Degradation, as well as
afforestation, reforestation, and effective conservation—if designed and implemented properly). Product
certification, green public procurement, standards,
labelling and voluntary actions provide additional
options for greening the supply chain and reducing
impacts on natural capital.
Reforming environmentally harmful subsidies:
Global subsidies amount to almost $1 trillion per
year for agriculture, fisheries, energy, transport and
other sectors combined. Up to a third of these are
subsidies supporting the production and consumption
of fossil fuels. Reforming subsidies that are inefficient,
outdated or harmful makes double sense during a
time of economic and ecological crisis.
Addressing losses through regulation and
pricing: Many threats to biodiversity and ecosystem
services can be tackled through robust regulatory frameworks
that establish environmental standards and
liability regimes. These are already tried and tested
and can perform even better when linked to pricing
and compensation mechanisms based on the "polluter
pays" and "full cost recovery" principles—to alter
the status quo which often leaves society to pay the
price.
Adding value through protected areas: The global
protected area network covers around 13.9 percent of
the Earth's land surface, 5.9 percent of territorial seas and
only 0.5 percent of the high seas: Nearly a sixth of the
world's population depend on protected areas for a
significant percentage of their livelihoods. increasing
coverage and funding, including through payment for
ecosystem services (PES) schemes, would leverage
their potential to maintain biodiversity and expand the
flow of ecosystem services for local, national and
global benefit.
Investing in ecological infrastructure: This can
provide cost-effective opportunities to meet policy
objectives, e.g. increased resilience to climate
change, reduced risk from natural hazards, improved
food and water security as a contribution to poverty
alleviation. Up-front investments in maintenance and
conservation are almost always cheaper than trying
to restore damaged ecosystems. Nevertheless, the
social benefits that flow from restoration can be
several times higher than the costs.
Part IV: The road ahead: responding to the
value of nature
The need to move our economies onto a low-carbon
path and the benefits of doing so are now widely
acknowledged—yet the need to move towards a truly
resource efficient economy, and the role of biodiversity
and ecosystems in this transition, are still largely misunderstood
or under-appreciated. Building momentum
for the transition to a resource efficient economy
calls for international cooperation, partnerships and
communication. Every country is different and will
need to tailor its responses to the national context. However, all may stand to gain—countries, businesses,
people on the ground—by sharing ideas, experience
and capacity. Policy champions can lead this
process and use windows of opportunity to forge
a new consensus to protect biodiversity and ecosystems
and their flows of services. The TEEB
studies and analysis hope to contribute to this new
momentum.
