Land in balance: the scientific conceptual framework for land degradation neutrality

The health and productivity of global land resources are declining, while demand for those resources is increasing. The aim of land degradation neutrality (LDN) is to maintain or enhance land-based natural capital and its associated ecosystem services. The Scientific Conceptual Framework for Land Degradation Neutrality has been developed to provide a scientific approach to planning, implementing and monitoring LDN. The Science-Policy Interface of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) led the development of the conceptual framework, drawing in expertise from a diverse range of disciplines. The LDN conceptual framework focuses on the supporting processes required to deliver LDN, including biophysical and socio-economic aspects, and their interactions. Neutrality implies no net loss of the land-based natural capital relative to a reference state, or baseline. Planning for neutrality involves projecting the likely cumulative impacts of land use and land management decisions, then counterbalancing anticipated losses with measures to achieve equivalent gains. Counterbalancing should occur only within individual land types, distinguished by land potential, to ensure “like for like” exchanges. Actions to achieve LDN include sustainable land management (SLM) practices that avoid or reduce degradation, coupled with efforts to reverse degradation through restoration or rehabilitation of degraded land. The response hierarchy of Avoid > Reduce > Reverse land degradation articulates the priorities in planning LDN interventions. The implementation of LDN is managed at the landscape level through integrated land use planning, while achievement is assessed at national level. Monitoring LDN status involves quantifying the balance between the area of gains (significant positive changes in LDN indicators) and area of losses (significant negative changes in LDN indicators), within each land type across the landscape. The LDN indicators (and associated metrics) are land cover (physical land cover class), land productivity (net primary productivity, NPP) and carbon stocks (soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks). The LDN conceptual framework comprises five modules: A: Vision of LDN describes the intended outcome of LDN; B: Frame of Reference clarifies the LDN baseline; C: Mechanism for Neutrality explains the counterbalancing mechanism; D: Achieving Neutrality presents the theory of change (logic model) articulating the impact pathway; and E: Monitoring Neutrality presents the LDN indicators. Principles that govern application of the framework provide flexibility while reducing risk of unintended outcomes.Annette L. Cowie, Barron J. Orr, Victor M. Castillo Sanchez, Pamela Chasek, Neville D. Crossman, Alexander Erlewein, Geertrui Louwagie, Martine Maron, Graciela I. Metternicht, Sara Minelli, Anna E. Tengberg, Sven Walter, Shelley Welto

A critical review of smaller state diplomacy

In The Peloponnesian War, Thucydides (1972: 402) highlights the effects of the general, overall weakness of smaller states vis-à-vis larger, more powerful ones in a key passage, where the Athenians remind the Melians that: “… since you know as well as we do that, as the world goes, right is only in question between equals in power. Meanwhile, the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” Concerns about the vulnerability of small, weak, isolated states have echoed throughout history: from Thucydides, through the review by Machiavelli (1985) of the risks of inviting great powers to intervene in domestic affairs, through 20th century US-led contemporary political science (Vital, 1971; Handel, 1990) and Commonwealth led scholarship (Commonwealth Secretariat, 1985). In the context of 20th century ‘Balkanization’, the small state could also prove unstable, even hostile and uncooperative, a situation tempting enough to invite the intrusion of more powerful neighbours: a combination, according to Brzezinski (1997: 123-124) of a power vacuum and a corollary power suction2: in the outcome, if the small state is ‘absorbed’, it would be its fault, and its destiny, in the grand scheme of things. In an excellent review of small states in the context of the global politics of development, Payne (2004: 623, 634) concludes that “vulnerabilities rather than opportunities are the most striking consequence of smallness”. It has been recently claimed that, since they cannot defend or represent themselves adequately, small states “lack real independence, which makes them suboptimal participants in the international system” (Hagalin, 2005: 1). There is however, a less notable and acknowledged but more extraordinary strand of argumentation that considers ‘the power of powerlessness’, and the ability of small states to exploit their smaller size in a variety of ways in order to achieve their intended, even if unlikely, policy outcomes. The pursuance of smaller state goals becomes paradoxically acceptable and achievable precisely because such smaller states do not have the power to leverage disputants or pursue their own agenda. A case in point concerns the smallest state of all, the Vatican, whose powers are both unique and ambiguous, but certainly not insignificant (The Economist, 2007). Smaller states have “punched above their weight” (e.g. Edis, 1991); and, intermittently, political scientists confront their “amazing intractability” (e.g. Suhrke, 1973: 508). Henry Kissinger (1982: 172) referred to this stance, with obvious contempt, as “the tyranny of the weak”3. This paper seeks a safe passage through these two, equally reductionist, propositions. It deliberately focuses first on a comparative case analysis of two, distinct ‘small state-big state’ contests drawn from the 1970s, seeking to infer and tease out the conditions that enable smaller ‘Lilliputian’ states (whether often or rarely) to beat their respective Goliaths. The discussion is then taken forward to examine whether similar tactics can work in relation to contemporary concerns with environmental vulnerability, with a focus on two other, small island states. Before that, the semiotics of ‘the small state’ need to be explored, since they are suggestive of the perceptions and expectations that are harboured by decision makers at home and abroad and which tend towards the self-fulfilling prophecy.peer-reviewe

Monitoring and assessment of desertification, land degradation and drought: knowledge management, institutions and economics

White Paper of the DSD Working Group 3. Association of DesertNet International ; United Nations University – Institute for Water, Environment and Health ; Dryland Science for Development ConsortiumInternational audienceInadequate access to data and its harmonisation and dissemination, institutional constraints, and insufficient public finances all limit local and national capacities to monitor and assess desertification and land degradation. Furthermore, monitoring and assessment is often hindered by a lack of inter-departmental and sectoral communication and insufficient information on the costs associated with prevention and reversal of land degradation. This White Paper identifies the challenges and bottlenecks in the monitoring and assessment of desertification and land degradation in the context of knowledge management, institutions and economics. It discusses the challenges of integrating knowledge management and its practices into monitoring and assessment at various levels, and the need for doing so. It also outlines some success stories on knowledge management at the local level. This White Paper further looks at the economic and social drivers of desertification and land degradation, and how policy mechanisms are needed in order to address these issues and produce more sustainable outcomes. The findings of this Paper were presented at the First UNCCD Scientific Conference held during the COP-9 in Buenos Aires, Argentina from 22-24 September, 2009

Monitoring and assessment of desertification, land degradation and drought: knowledge management, institutions and economics

White Paper of the DSD Working Group 3. Association of DesertNet International ; United Nations University – Institute for Water, Environment and Health ; Dryland Science for Development ConsortiumInternational audienceInadequate access to data and its harmonisation and dissemination, institutional constraints, and insufficient public finances all limit local and national capacities to monitor and assess desertification and land degradation. Furthermore, monitoring and assessment is often hindered by a lack of inter-departmental and sectoral communication and insufficient information on the costs associated with prevention and reversal of land degradation. This White Paper identifies the challenges and bottlenecks in the monitoring and assessment of desertification and land degradation in the context of knowledge management, institutions and economics. It discusses the challenges of integrating knowledge management and its practices into monitoring and assessment at various levels, and the need for doing so. It also outlines some success stories on knowledge management at the local level. This White Paper further looks at the economic and social drivers of desertification and land degradation, and how policy mechanisms are needed in order to address these issues and produce more sustainable outcomes. The findings of this Paper were presented at the First UNCCD Scientific Conference held during the COP-9 in Buenos Aires, Argentina from 22-24 September, 2009

U.S. policy in the UN environmental arena: powerful laggard or constructive leader?

Environment, Sustainable development, United Nations, United States,

Assessing UN indicators of land degradation neutrality and proportion of degraded land for Botswana using remote sensing based national level metrics

Achieving land degradation neutrality (LDN) has been proposed as a way to stem the loss of land resources globally. To date, LDN operationalization at the country level has remained a challenge both from a policy and science perspective. Using an approach incorporating cloud‐based geospatial computing with machine learning, national level datasets of land cover, land productivity dynamics, and soil organic carbon stocks were developed. Using the example of Botswana, LDN and proportion of degraded land were assessed. Between 2000 and 2015, grassland lost approximately 17% of its original extent, the highest level of loss for any land category; land productivity decline was highest in artificial surface areas (11%), whereas 36% of croplands show early signs of decline. With the use of national metrics (NM), degraded areas were found to be 32.6% compared to 51.4% of the total land area when global default datasets (DD) were used. Estimates of degraded land computed with NM and DD were validated in Palapye, an agro‐pastoral region in eastern Botswana, where Composite Land Degradation Index (CLDI) field‐based data exists. Comparing land degradation (LD) in the three datasets (NM, DD, and CLDI), NM estimates were closest to the field data. The extra efforts put into developing national level data for LD assessment in this study is, thus, well‐justified. Beyond demonstrating remote sensing viability for LD assessment, the study developed procedures for generating and validating national level datasets. Using these procedures, LD monitoring will be enhanced in Botswana and elsewhere since these remote sensing datasets can be updated using freely available satellite datasets