Exploring future agricultural development and biodiversity in Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi: a spatially explicit scenario-based assessment

Competition for land is increasing as a consequence of the growing demands for food and other commodities and the need to conserve biodiversity and ecosystem services. Land conversion and the intensification of current agricultural systems continues to lead to a loss of biodiversity and trade-offs among ecosystem functions. Decision-makers need to understand these trade-offs in order to better balance different demands on land and resources. There is an urgent need for spatially explicit information and analyses on the effects of different trajectories of human-induced landscape change in biodiversity and ecosystem services. We assess the potential implications of a set of plausible socio-economic and climate scenarios for agricultural production and demand and model-associated land use and land cover changes between 2005 and 2050 to assess potential impacts on biodiversity in Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi. We show that different future socio-economic scenarios are consistent in their projections of areas of high agricultural development leading to similar spatial patterns of habitat and biodiversity loss. Yet, we also show that without protected areas, biodiversity losses are higher and that expanding protected areas to include other important biodiversity areas can help reduce biodiversity losses in all three countries. These results highlight the need for effective protection and the potential benefits of expanding the protected area network while meeting agricultural production needs

Status and Trends in Global Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital: Assessing Progress Toward Aichi Biodiversity Target 14

The Convention on Biological Diversity uses six indicators to assess progress toward Aichi Biodiversity Target 14 (ecosystem services), leaving many elements of the target untracked. We identify 13 ecosystem services as directly essential for human well-being, and select a set of 21 datasets as indicators of the state of natural capital underpinning those services, the benefits derived from them, and distribution of access to those benefits. Analysis of these indicators supports previous conclusions that there is no overall progress toward Target 14. Sixty percent of our “benefit” indicators have positive trends, whereas 86% of our “state” indicators show a decline in natural capital. This suggests that well-being is increasing in the near-term despite environmental degradation, and that unsustainable use of natural capital may fuel human development. As regulating services such as “soil fertility” continue to decline, however, it seems unlikely that this trend can continue without future negative impacts on humanity

Multi-factor, multi-state, multi-model scenarios: Exploring food and climate futures for Southeast Asia

Decision-makers aiming to improve food security, livelihoods and resilience are faced with an uncertain future. To develop robust policies they need tools to explore the potential effects of uncertain climatic, socioeconomic, and environmental changes. Methods have been developed to use scenarios to present alternative futures to inform policy. Nevertheless, many of these can limit the possibility space with which decision-makers engage. This paper will present a participatory scenario process that maintains a large possibility space through the use of multiple factors and factor-states and a multi-model ensemble to create and quantify four regional scenarios for Southeast Asia. To do this we will explain 1) the process of multi-factor, multi-state building was done in a stakeholder workshop in Vietnam, 2) the scenario quantification and model results from GLOBIOM and IMPACT, two economic models, and 3) how the scenarios have already been applied to diverse policy processes in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam

Mapping the planet’s critical natural assets

Sustaining the organisms, ecosystems and processes that underpin human wellbeing is necessary to achieve sustainable development. Here we define critical natural assets as the natural and semi-natural ecosystems that provide 90% of the total current magnitude of 14 types of nature’s contributions to people (NCP), and we map the global locations of these critical natural assets at 2 km resolution. Critical natural assets for maintaining local-scale NCP (12 of the 14 NCP) account for 30% of total global land area and 24% of national territorial waters, while 44% of land area is required to also maintain two global-scale NCP (carbon storage and moisture recycling). These areas overlap substantially with cultural diversity (areas containing 96% of global languages) and biodiversity (covering area requirements for 73% of birds and 66% of mammals). At least 87% of the world’s population live in the areas benefitting from critical natural assets for local-scale NCP, while only 16% live on the lands containing these assets. Many of the NCP mapped here are left out of international agreements focused on conserving species or mitigating climate change, yet this analysis shows that explicitly prioritizing critical natural assets and the NCP they provide could simultaneously advance development, climate and conservation goals.We thank all the participants of two working groups hosted by Conservation International and the Natural Capital Project for their insights and intellectual contributions. For further advice or assistance, we thank A. Adams, K. Brandon, K. Brauman, A. Cramer, G. Daily, J. Fisher, R. Gould, L. Mandle, J. Montgomery, A. Rodewald, D. Rossiter, E. Selig, A. Vogl and T. M. Wright. The two working groups that provided the foundation for this analysis were funded by support from the Marcus and Marianne Wallenberg Foundation to the Natural Capital Project (R.C.-K. and R.P.S.) and the Betty and Gordon Moore to Conservation International (R.A.N. and P.M.C.)