Regional Assessment for Europe and Central Asia Markus Fischer, Mark Rounsevell December 2015, Brussels

ECA region and sub-regions

Some characteristics of ECA Major human intervention (human-modified environments), but large variability across ECA Sub-regions with very different histories and time lines of human intervention Heterogeneity (cultures, governance structures, politics, natural heritage, implementation of environmental legislation) Example of heterogeneity: Number of worst IAS per country Source: North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien species (NOBANIS)

Some characteristics of ECA Large footprint (and dependency) of ECA on the biodiversity in other regions (global teleconnections) Ecological footprint variation per region Source: National Footprint Accounts 2014 Edition Kastner et al HANPP flows between regions Human Appropriation of Net Primary Productivity (HANPP)

Some characteristics of ECA Important transboundary issues, e.g. central position of water as resource, habitat and vector of pollution

Ample, but heterogeneous data Ample data; but large diversity in data availability/accessibility across ECA Common birds in Europe population index Mean change in abundance with time for the different feeding guilds of 144 birds over 28 European countries ( ) Source: After Inger et al. (2015) Source: European Bird Census Council, Birdlife International, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Statistics Netherlands

Scenarios and modeling results available Source: Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) Example: Projected spatial mismatches of the Portuguese Dappled White butterfly and its host plants

What is an assessment? ReviewAssessment AudienceScientistsDecision-makers Done byOne or a fewLarge and varied group TopicSimple and narrowBroad and complex Identifies gaps inResearch: curiosity-driven Knowledge for implementation: solution-driven (Un)certainty statementsNot requiredEssential JudgementHiddenRequired but clearly flagged CoverageExhaustive, historicalSufficient to deal with main range of uncertainty SynthesisNot requiredEssential to reduce complexity After Millennium Ecosystem Assessment “An assessment is a critical evaluation of information, for purposes of informing decisions on a complex, public issue”

ECA regional assessment is based on IPBES conceptual framework

MAES and IPBES conceptual frameworks are similar social-ecological systems

IPBES asked for scoping, taking requests into account IPBES asked for RA by 2018 FAM meeting September 2015 FOD review in 2016 Second review 2017 ECA RA history

Outline of ECA regional assessment 2

3

4

5

6

This outline of ECA RA covers major requests ,5 6

ECA (a) How can ecosystems that provide ecosystem services, such as those underpinning ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change and nature-based solutions to sustainable development, be protected through investments, regulations and management regimes for terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine systems? ECA (b) What are the effects of production, consumption and economic development on biodiversity and ecosystem services and their contribution to human well-being (also considering links to other regions)? ECA (c) How can sectoral policies and new policy instruments encourage opportunities arising from the contribution of biodiversity and ecosystem services to human well-being? ECA-specific policy-relevant key questions Ecology-based opportunities Economic development Policy sectors and instruments Options and opportunities with regard to BD, ES and their role for HWB. Including promoting food security, economic development and equality, while avoiding ecosystem degradation and conserving cultural landscapes.

Indirect drivers (Chapter 4, 5, 6) Strategic Goal A Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society Direct drivers (Chapter 4,6) Strategic Goal B Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use Conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems (Chapter 3, 4, 6) Strategic Goal C To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity Nature’s benefits to people (Chapter 2, 5, 6) Strategic Goal D Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services Options and opportunities (Chapter 6) Strategic Goal E Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building ECA RA addresses Aichi targets

ECA RA relevant for SDGs

State of ECA RA Addresses requests by governments and MEAs Legitimation and mutual recognition of roles and responsibilities among experts accomplished Clear attribution of impacts (“arrows in the CF”) Global teleconnection of the region considered Focus on the whole-region level when possible; finer resolution where necessary. First order draft by May 2016, final report 2018 MAES information welcome

ECA RA Challenges Enormous scope and ambitious timelines Heterogeneity of region Balanced representation by experts Integration with thematic assessments on invasive alien species, land degradation and sustainable use of biodiversity Integration of indigenous and local knowledge Harmonisation with three other regional assessments and global assessment

ECA conclusions so far Follows IPBES conceptual framework + addresses ECA-specificities Inclusive valuation important (intrinsic, instrumental, relational values) Enormous scope makes it hard, but is what it needs Non-prescriptive, opportunity-oriented ECA